-
Posts
11,793 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Baggins
-
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
My first thought was a broken nose. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
You're arguing with the clear evidence? -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
Wouldn't that indicate it took them longer to develop? -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Bettman does nothing in cba negotiations that isn't mandated by the owners. Teams that handed out long term circumvention contracts (and yes they were to circumvent the cap) are in the minority. What goes into the cba is decided by the "majority". Fans give Bettman way too much power credit. If he's not doing what the majority want he's out of a job. The fact (and yes it's a fact) that his term was extended with a rather nice raise is a sure indicator he's doing exactly what the majority of owners want. You guys simply need somebody to blame and Bettman is the face that takes the heat for the owners. But in the end it's the owners that make the major decisions regarding rules changes, reffing, and what goes into the cba. Bettmans job is to get what the owners want. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Well considering the owners wanted it I have trouble believing any GM in the league didn't expect it to happen. Fans that didn't believe the owners would get that claw back are idiots. Being a team that spends to the cap makes a cap drop a difficult situation to improve the team. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Actually what Gillis said was he didn't believe in asking players to waive ntc's as they had earned them. And the twins were in the final year of their deal so without having met or talked to them he wasn't sure if he would be building the team around them. I hate to break it to you, but we're not the only team with a core of ntc's. It's how you get deals below market value. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Isn't getting what you want the obvious goal of a trade? There isn't much point in trading assets for assets you don't need. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
He didn't have to dangle Cody in his previous talks with those six GM's. All six simply said the player Gillis was interested in was untouchable. Power forwards are coveted in the league. Buffalo's situation changed that season with another young power forward breaking out and thus making Kassian expendable. When it comes to trades it's about both sides filling a need. Not just one side. We weren't going to get an established power forward for Cody. Anybody expecting the same skill level coming back has no clue how trades work. So no, I don't see it as a knee-jerk move at all. I see it as trading a player that needed to be moved for exactly what you had been looking for the past year when it became available. Cody was getting moved by the offseason regardless. It's no secret he wasn't happy with his situation here and with two better options ahead of him that wasn't going to change. He had one more year on his elc to earn a homerun contract and it wouldn't happen here with his ice time and role. I fully expected him to be moved in the offseason but Buffalo wasn't going to wait when they still had a shot at the playoffs. The timing had everything to do with Buffalo's situation. They were a few wins out of the playoffs and in desperate need of a center to compete for that playoff spot. Kassian was made available. Sometimes you have to deal when what you are looking for is made available. Hodgson wouldn't have saved our playoffs any more than he saved Buffalo's playoff bid. He played himself off Buffalo's second line yet you believe he would have saved our playoffs? That's the simple truth of it. Either Schneider or Lou needed to be traded. Period. The fact Lou (and his restrictive contract) couldn't be moved for anything of real value meant Schneider had to go. Although I would have preferred keeping Schneider, I think we got a good return for him and still have a good goalie in Lou even if I hate his contract. Btw, I don't think we got lucky with Lack. He's been a solid prospect and was going to be backup to whoever stayed as the starter. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Higgins has a limited ntc. Pretty sure Hansen has the same limited ntc in his deal. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Poor Lou...got outplayed by his backup and lost his job. Then of course we couldn't trade his albatross of a contract. I don't consider that being hung out to dry. The starting role is his to lose and he did. -
Gillis silent while Canucks need him most (Bold moves my ass)
Baggins replied to Jamaicanice's topic in Canucks Talk
Offering more isn't the same as offering what's wanted. Gillis said he'd already inquired about the availability of several young power fowards but none of the GM's were willing to trade them at the time. That's the return for Hodgson he was looking for. When one became available he made the deal. As to Schneider I don't think goalies are getting the return they did even two years ago. There's a lot of good young goalies out there. But a top ten pick in a deep draft is a pretty good return as far as I'm concerned. The odds are heavy on the success side in picking that high. A blue chip is something we needed for the future and I think we got one. A GM can't only look at now, he has to have cheap replacements for the future as well. One of the problems Gillis walked into here. I have no problem at all with either of those deals as they both addressed a need. Size with offensive potential and a relatively sure thing for the future. Our core isn't getting younger. Some can be replaced from the UFA market but doing so doesn't give you those cheap entry level deals that allow you to add extra. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
So what you're saying is Hodgson isn't good enough to carry a line, and should be a top line player. Good thing we traded him. -
Because smaller players have never enjoyed playoff success.......
-
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
Trades are made to address a need. Buffalo needed a center and wanted a younger player ready to step in. We were looking to get bigger and younger. Exactly what Buffalo was willing to move to get their center. Neither was traded because the team had given up on them or they weren't performing. They were traded because both teams had better options for the same role ahead of these two at the time of the trade. Players are simply tradeable assets. I fully expected Hodgson to be moved in the off-season. With Henrik and Kes ahead of him he was time limited as third line center. The move came sooner because exactly what Gillis was looking for became available at the trade deadline. Buffalo wasn't going to wait because they were still in the playoff hunt and needed a center for the push. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
Well he's a certain top six player on the worst team in the league. Don't think he makes the top six on this team. He'd still have Henrik and Kes ahead of him. I'm guessing his defensive play might give Torts fits like nothing Edler's seen. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
Remember MG's comment "we need to get bigger and younger". This was a trade that addressed that need and we moved an unhappy player to do it. And no you wouldn't have got what you're looking for with Hodgson unless it was for a rental player. And even at that it would likely have cost a 1st or second pick as well. I'd rather not waste that on a rental. Jagr cost the Bruins a 1st rounder and he's not even a top player any more. Iginla cost a first plus two college prospects. A rental is not what we needed for Hodgson. We got something this team has been sorely lacking for Hodgson. I think you have him overrated. Keeping Hodgson would not have gotten us to the cup that year and he was unlikely to have made enough difference to have gotten us out of the first round either. In addition he wouldn't have been here the following year whether it was MG trading him or Hodgson demanding a trade in the summer. One of the two would have happened. -
That would certainly explain her hating it there. Although it just being Edmonton would be enough for me. One trip there and I hope to never be back in this lifetime. Calgary on the other hand I've been to many times and really enjoy the city.
-
With Schroeder being waiver eligible, combine that with injuries and very limited NHL experience I'd say he has little trade value right now. Very likely less than Booth whose value is mediocre at best considering his price tag and run of injuries.
-
Sundin refused to waive his ntc as did Kaberle. Two that were quite public. We'll never know who or how many are asked and decline in a less public way. You are right that they could reduce his role or sit him in an effort to convince him to waive his ntc but is that a good course of action for the image of the teams management? And what does that do to his trade value? The easy going Swede may not even care if his role is reduced. But to say an ntc is meaningless is naive at best as it does give the player quite a bit of control.
-
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
That's because the vast majority on this board are completely unrealistic when it's come to trades. The reason I rarely wander into the Armchair GMing section unless of course I'm bored and looking for a good laugh. Btw, Gillis said he needs development but would also help now. The help now was physical presence not production. Unless of course MG has some hidden magic wand to suddenly transform Kassian from what he was producing in Buffalo. As I said, if Kassian was the same level offensively as Hodgson the trade would have cost considerably more than Hodgson. That shows you are unrealistic about trades right there. So many here overrate Hodgson and underrate Kassian. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
No they didn't. They weren't equal point producers at the time of the trade. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
Hodgson didn't exactly fill our need either with both Henrik and Kesler ahead of him and him complaining about his ice time. As I've said you weren't going to get the same skill back that included the attributes we needed for Hodgson. Nor would you get your battle hardened veteran of the skill level you want for him. He was still relatively unproven then and still isn't a star in this league today. This wasn't a trade for now. It was a trade for the future. That was a given at the time. This trade addressed a need for both teams and both teams need to give the players the time and opportunity to reach their full potential. -
And I keep asking why Edler is going to waive his ntc within a year of getting it for taking less than market value. The few times I've heard of it happening it was the player asking to be moved because he wasn't happy in his current situation. Like Pronger asking to be moved out of Edmonton after one season because his wife absolutely hated it there. The majority of waived ntc's are players who are pending ufa's on non-playoff teams or players who are unhappy in their situation and actually ask to be moved. Neither scenario applies to Edler. Add in MG's public statement that he won't ask players to waive their ntc and Edler proposals become completely pointless.
-
Who was/is the better back up? Schneider or Lack?
Baggins replied to TheRick's topic in Canucks Talk
I sure hope Lack is if Lou asks to be traded in the off-season. -
Too Early to call Kassian a dissapointment?
Baggins replied to Go Go Canucks Go's topic in Canucks Talk
The 50+ point scenario I was referring to was if they were both at that level at the time of the trade. If Kassian was at the same skill level as Hodgson at the time of the trade no GM in his would right mind would trade him for just Hodgson. Kassian is faster, bigger, more physical and willing to drop the gloves. Attributes Hodgson will never have. This trade wasn't about point totals, it was about the types of players and addressing a need.