Baggins
-
Posts
11,793 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Baggins
-
-
Filppula
5 years @ $5m per
Doesn't PK
Doesn't play physical
Doesn't agitate
Only one 40+ point year in seven seasons
Yet in your mind Burrows isn't worth $4.5m.
-
I haven't seen a NTC prevent a player movement yet other than when the player was universally not wanted. It all relates back to the dollars involved. ie Gomez. How does Gillis play hardball on NTC's when other GM's hand them out as a matter of course. It is a fine line that team managements have to thread. Half the NHL have losing seasons. Van's management was in the top 10 and still couldn't cut it with expectations. The classic was Gillis's comment that he would hire his new coach from the assembled sports writers. He should perhaps extend his search to the CDC.
Sundin refused to waive his in Toronto as did one of the d-men. Players have declined to waive their ntc's. There's typically a reason a player will waive his ntc as opposed to doing it out of the goodness of his heart.
-
Elder should probably be traded for help up front.
Very unlikely. How much credibility will a GM have negotiating with players after getting a player to sign for a discount, give him a NTC, and then turn around and trade him? You can kiss any further player below market discounts good-bye.
-
The things that AV did that caused him to be let go.
- He trusted Alberts over Ballard in a playoff series where we needed more offense.
- Kassian kept being bounced over all 4 lines.
- Benches Ballard which is fine if it's based on performance, but would keep Edler who was doing horrible getting top minutes.
- When we got secondary scoring during the season from Hansen Schroeder and Higgins, and that line was going, he broke them up.
- The dreaded drop pass.
- Kept Edler on the point on 1st unit power play, when he could have used Garrison.
Honestly folks, AV looked at the last two games like a frustrated coach, who didn't have any tricks up his sleeve, and didn't seem to be comfortable with the players he had to work with.
AV will find a job in no time. Gillis on the other hand, if he doesn't clean up his own messes as quickly as he can, he will probably be back as an agent.
If Ballard is bought out as I suspect he will be, I'd say it was MG's call. If he suffered a long term injury he couldn't be bought out. We'll never know for sure but putting him in the press box was the only way to ensure he could be bought out.
-
Sarcasm detector broken, baggins?
Apparently it is. Particularly at 5:30 am at work.
-
Well of course now that AV is gone, we're sure to see Ballard playing top four minutes and putting up 30 pts, right? Everyone's happy...
I know I'm certainly looking forward to seeing that...
And who is moving to the bottom pair, Hamhuis or Edler?
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
MG should have been first to go.
-
15
-
AV wasn't using Garrison on the PP or in more crutial offenstive situations.
That would be because at the beginning of the season he wasn't very good on the PP. So AV took him out of those situations until he got use to the system and got comfortable playing on his off side, the right side. To me that's easing a player into it as opposed to throwing him into a sink or swim situation. As Garrisons confidence grew on the right side he was given more responsibility. Seems to me that's coaching a player to succeed and he has.
-
After Garrison was signed this past summer I said we would look back and say this was the best signing of the summer. With Suter's play Garrison may not be the best, but it's certainly a close 2nd. Once AV started to play JG properly he started to be everything he was expected to be when he signed here. It's nice to see the team finally using his slap shot, they need to use it more.
How exactly was AV using him improperly? It always makes me laugh that it's AV's fault when a player doesn't perform well.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Yup... Garrison sucks. More than 1/4 of the way through the season, and this guy has been nothing but absolute garbage.
His shot? Non-existent, and completely inaccurate.
His hits? What hits?
His defensive play? HORRIBLE.
So why did we sign him? WHY THE HELL does he make this kind of money? And we think Ballard is who we have to buy out this off-season?
Sorry to say, Garrison is a bust. J-Bo 2.0. Thank god for the quick fix that is buyouts.
Thanks for nothing, Garrison.
EDIT: oh, and PLAY SOME DISCIPLINED ****ING HOCKEY, DUDE!
I just had to drag this one up.
Garrison numbers prorated to an 82 game season....
14g (8.5 shooting percentage)
14a
28pts
+33
That's with a slow start due to no training camp or preseason to acclimate a new team and system. Not to mention less practice time during the season due to the condensed schedule.
I'm lmao at you shmo. Here hit this again....
-
6
-
Good post. People forget his off season rehab along with a late start. Plus AV didn't use him where he was intended to be used at the beginning.
I like Barker but I think you're right about him being the weakest link. The guy's skating leaves a bit to be desired. How ever his brain work shows he's been their before. Barker could become quite valuable in the play offs, he's won a Cup. He's a team guy. I've not heard one bad thing about him.
Many here have the memory of a two year old.
-
Actually, most teams did not play their top line against the Sedins, they did, if they could, played their checking line - usually their third line.
Home games AV often matched the Sedins up against the oppositions top line. Road games they always faced to oppositions shutdown line.
-
1
-
-
Nah,he sucked early on and went into the doghouse.No synergy and blasting pucks like a lunatic.
He has done really well these last 15 games,fit right in and is playing a vital role.
No, Edler sucked early on while Garrison struggled a bit with a new team and new system. Excuses that certainly didn't apply to Edler performance.
I'd say Garrison played well after his first 15 games and has improved since with increased familiarity.
-
I knew he was going to be great for us. People need to learn to be patient.
You won't find much of that on this board.
Now, now now! Oh, bust! Is what you'll find far more of.
-
1
-
-
Not convinced with the signing yet; in my opinion, he should be making about 1M less per year. Definitely not worth anything near 4.6M for 6 years that's for sure. He's not a very good skater nor does he have much hockey sense. On the positive, he's ok defensively and has a good shot (albeit not very accurate). Only time will tell, but I don't think he will live up to the contract.
No concept of player values.
-
CDC has been wrong about a lot of players over the years, but I don't think they've ever been AS wrong as they are about Garrison. A 4.6 cap hit for an elite defender who can chip in with above average offense is a damn bargain.
Elite may be a stretch, but very good isn't. I agree that most here are clueless to market values. Weber 4 years at $14m, two at $12m, then it drops to $6m. Suter two years at $12m, one at $11m, then five at $9m. Compare that to what our guys are getting and it's apparent we got very good deals without life long contracts.
-
3
-
-
Quite possibly yes. We were always a better team with Salo in the lineup, regardless of his goal totals. He was a very calming influence back there and unlike Garrison, can hit the damn net once in awhile.
Don't get me wrong, I am not knocking Garrison, but he (and Edler in particular) need to get it together big time. Arrg so many issues with the team this year, can't call out just the D.
I think the calming effect is in your head. Garrison has been fine defensively as far as I'm concerned. What would really be nice is if somebody could start putting a pass into the sweet spot for a one timer. He has a great one timer and he keeps getting passes in his feet or behind him. I'd like to see him on the 1st pp with the Sedins more. He's also one of the few that gets physical in front of our own net. You do realize the only player with a better +/- on the team is Henrik.
None of our D are paid what the elite d-men are getting. Stop expecting them to perform like elite d-men and even those elite d-men make their mistakes. Edler has certainly had his bad games but Hamhuis hasn't exactly performed as well defensively as his usual self. It seems many here are just looking for reasons to be critical of Garrison because he replaced a favorite in Salo.
-
2
-
-
Sami Salo says hi~
Because we'd have more wins with his 2 goals than Garrisons 3?
-
1
-
-
Three points in 16 games? justifies his contract? He was selling his offense, we bought it, and it certainly hasn't paid off.
and 16 games is enough to declare a guy a bust???
-
2
-
-
Whats the time frame for the adjustment? Just wondering. Christian Ehrhoff, Dan Hamhius, had no issues adjusting to our system right away. Oh right, those are defencemens at a different level, I forgot that, despite being payed the same, he is not even at their level. I do however hope he snaps out of his slump.
Actually Hamhuis didn't start producing points until mid December his first season. And he had a training camp and preseason under his belt. Bieksa also had a slow start that first year with Hamhuis. Ehrhoff also started his first season a little slow but had the advantage of Sedinery on the 1st pp unit to pick it up quicker.
No instant gratification on this board = bust. It always amazes me how quickly Canuck fans turn on players.
-
1
-
-
That's why they could have put Hodgson on the second line, and simply shift Kesler over to a wing. That would've been in my view, a dynamic secondary two-way threat. Sometimes, people know they are worth more than what the "upper management" gives them, and no self-respecting player would settle for less. Gillis should've been more empowering to Hodgson here
Sure displace your Selke winning center to make room for a whiney prospect. Makes complete sense. How would the Selke winner feel about that? Maybe the veteran feels "he worth more than that".
Unlike most here, I fully expected Hodgson to get moved. He wasn't going to sit on the third line until Henrik or Kes retired. Nor would he displace either any time soon. He was a moveable asset.
AV almost rarely ever played Ballard, even when the guy was healthy - often times, he resorted to using Rome. Even when playing and at good health, he was still underwhelming for the price paid.
Ballard didn't get the ice time because he wasn't playing well. Didn't I already say that? Edler is better offensively and Hamhuis is better defensively. Where does that put Ballard? Third pair with third pair ice time. He resorted to Rome because at least he played a safe simple game and was effective. When Ballard played well his ice time went up. When he played poorly his ice time went down. Doesn't that seem the least bit sensible?
Grabner alone is worth more than what you rate him. He's managing almost a PPG this season, has far more runway, and would've been valuable depth. Limited depth hurt Vancouver in the final round against Boston with all the injuries piling up.
At best, Ballard wasn't worth what they traded.
It doesn't matter what Grabner does after the fact. It matters what the situation was at the time he was moved. Our ENTIRE top six coming off a career year. Grabner never showing up to camp in game shape. Grabner being waiver eligible. Those are the FACTS of the situation. Add it up and Grabner had little chance of making the team but had enough potential he wouldn't clear waivers. Something is better than nothing. Which is what we would have had if we hadn't traded him. What does Florida have out of the deal? A draft pick with one whole NHL game under his belt. We have a d-man that's currently playing well. So who won the trade at this point? I could give a rats tush if Grabner ever scores 50 goals. It wasn;t going to happen here because he wouldn't have made the team and wouldn't have cleared waivers. Again, something is better than what Florida currently has out of the deal. How did Grabner work out for Florida? He showed up in poor shape (yet again), didn't impress (yet again), didn't clear waivers (as expected), and was claimed by a team even more desperate for forwards. Like that wouldn't have happened here on a contender whose top six veterans were coming off a career year. That was the situation. That's why he was moved.
The fact that Linden isn't even sitting as a Canuck ambassador, even though that's just an honourary title. But earlier, people were suggesting there is a rift with Linden and the Canucks. Even if there isn't, his absence in an active role is taking the team the wrong way.
What people? Your school chums? Linden has his property development business, his fitness center business, still does public speaking, his charity involvement, and is quite happy not having the team travel schedule. Yet, he still makes appearances at games. What on earth makes you think he's unhappy? It seems to me you're simply unhappy with his choices and would prefer to make crap up that face reality.
The sinking ship was last season when they fell to the eighth seeded Kings and are hardly in a better position this season to even win a Presidents' Trophy, let alone battle back to the finals.
Sure , falling to one of the best goalies in the league while our top two goal scorers were injured is just rediculous. Even the mighty free spending pre-cap Red Wings had first round exits. Keep hitting that panic button kid, this season is still young and we're still missing two of our second line players. Yet we're still leading our division. That just sucks.
-
1
-
-
Well, surprisingly this trade is turning out well. Didn't really expect this, but even then, one can't help but feel the axe-above-you, what if something were to happen to cause another rift with Kassian and they trade him?
The "rift" of which you speak was all about playing time. Something Hodgson seemed to feel entitled to despite a Selke and Art Ross winner ahead of him in the depth chart. Kassian on the other hand appears to be happy earning what he gets. He said himself his promotion to the top line can be taken away as easily as it was given. There seems to be a distinct attitude difference between the two.
Okay, well now the Ballard matter is turning around - well after the moment was gone (in 2011). Again, there's no guarantee he and AV have sealed up their rift. Even then, I wouldn't have made that trade - it was a steep overpayment. I rather would have kept Mitchell and Bieksa and sign Hamhuis.
Who says there's a rift to be sealed up? Ballard arrived damaged and was redamaged twice his first season. He didn't play well. At the time of the trade, and the signing of Hamhuis, Mitchell hadn't skated or even started working out since his concussion in January. He didn't even start skating (without contact) until mid August.
I didn't see the Ballard trade as a "steep overpayment" at all. Do you know why we got Ehrhoff so cheap from San Jose? We also took Brad Lukowich as a San Jose salary dump. Florida took Bernier off our hands as a salary dump. What else did Florida get for Ballard? A late first round pick that may or may not pan out (or be several years away from helping) and a waiver eligible prospect with a penchant for showing up to camp in poor shape. When you put it in realistic terms it doesn't sound like much for a proven NHL d-man. Florida got two future possibilities and an overpriced 3rd liner for a current top 4 d-man.
On Linden, it always pays to keep positive standing with your team's most important players in history. Rocky Wirtz understood that - when taking over the Hawks, he repaired the franchise's relationships with Bobby Hull and appointed him ambassador.
What makes you think there isn't a positive standing with Linden? I seem to recall him being on the ice for the Naslund number retirement. He'd only be there if he was invited. The only negative comment he's made since retiring was regarding Keenan. He even named Crawford and AV his his favorite coaches during his career.
So really, Gillis is turning out to be hockey's John Cummins, rebuilding the ship only to sink it. That's why I still rest my case that Linden should take over. Or perhaps Smyl, as someone else suggested, for his in-house experience.
Sure, back to back presidents trophies is a sinking ship.
It doesn't matter who the GM is, there is no guarantee at all of winning the cup. If there was, the free spending Red Wings would have won the cup every year for a decade. In a cap world a team can be favored, but anything can happen. Winning the cup requires three things: a good team, staying relatively healthy through the playoffs, and players getting hot at the right time. There's your big secret to winning the cup.
-
1
-
-
Well first, this thread exists so I'm not going to repeat myself over by making a new one.
Now, yes Gillis may have put together the best team ever at one point, but:
1. That team is falling apart. Gillis has failed to build and maintain players' relationships with the franchise and the city - otherwise, Hodgson wouldn't have wanted out, Luongo wouldn't have wanted out. Players are beginning to be made to feel expendable if someone better comes along or if they cannot pull their own weight. I mean, who's next? (You can say it's the players' own problem, but I'm telling you that the leadership is responsible for building relationships and making them feel valuable). Case in point, this current roster is almost inferior to the 2011 roster, unless they can trade Luongo for a top flight player - I wouldn't take anyone less than a Weber, Crosby, or Zetterberg (or at least someone on that caliber and who has at least seven years on his contract).
2. Canucks nation has been spoiled with promises of winning a Cup, they've become irrational fairweather fans who call for players' heads when things don't go well, and worse comes to worse, could start riots and brawls. Now, call me irrational and fairweather for wanting to get rid of Gillis, but I'm telling you this - public relations are the management's responsibility. What Gillis really should have been doing was emphasizing loyalty and connection before results. This means projecting realistic expectations for the fans and asking them not to bail when things are bad, but to continue to support the team. That, my friends, was Gillis' failure last season - but it was Linden's strong point, which was why we remained faithful when they stumbled.
3. I was actually mistaken about being third worst franchise, Canucks are ranked 92nd as of 2012. But they were among the most hated: http://bleacherrepor...couver-canucks. That's not because others were simply jealous, but because they had developed a reputation of being dirty players and embellishers who don't play fair and square or who complain when things don't go right. That attitude carries over to Canuck nation, enter what I said in #2.
Now, Linden says he isn't interested in returning to the team, even if he misses the guys. But truthfully, the Canucks have become a laughingstock in his absense. With Linden in charge, he will get them back to playing good, honest hockey and making the Canucks' home with the fans. In all honesty, after last season, I can no longer bring myself to cheer for this team - as long as Gillis is in charge, and Linden is anywhere but here.
1 - The team is falling apart? Panic much? Cody wanted out because he had a Hart and Selke winner ahead of him in the depth chart and wanted more ice time than 3C gets. The three guys you mention are on teams that don't need Lou. A package in return is more likely.
2 - When did anybody ever promise a cup? I suspect you're hearing voices nobody else hears. Linden was wearing an A on his chest when Burrows and Kesler were the Kings of diving and Cooke and Rutuu were throwing cheap shots. If he didn't say anything then what makes you think he'd say anything as GM?
3 - I could care less if others hate this team. Every team has their divers and every player complains about penalty calls. Those are simply used as excuses to hate a successful team. Every successful team has those that hate them.
-
1
-
-
You got it backwards. Cody's trading was the straw that broke the camel's back for me, that Gillis should go.
Maybe you should be the one to go, as Cody's not coming back. Buffalo has plenty of room on their wagon I hear.
Now if Linden were the GM, he would have been sure to invest in his people and not leave them out to dry.
Speculation or wishful thinking? For all you know Linden may have moved Cody out the moment his daddy started calling about his ice time.
As far as his being a scapegoat - well, that's just it. When things don't go so well, well he commands enough respect to keep people calm, he'll be honest and forthright on what's wrong and how to make it right. And worse comes to worse, if there's going to be a scapegoat, providing he's done all he can do (and knowing his character), it'll be someone else.
You underestimate Canuck fans. They have the bare minimum of patience and will turn on anybody if things go badly. They just tend to leave the guys "they like" till last.
Ultimately: Trevor isn't interested and Cody's not coming back. Time to move on.
CBC continues to ignore West and the Canucks
in Canucks Talk
Posted
I really do get sick of the CBC whining.
1 - CBC is a business and as the Leafs draw the largest audience, and viewers translates to revenue, they get more games televised.
2 - Montreal has the most games as they are televised on French CBC.. No other team will draw the same rating as the Habs on French CBC. That's their market
3 - Your tax dollars are nothing compared to Ontario and Quebec. You complain it's "your tax dollars" yet if CBC televises fewer Leaf games and more Canuck games they'll need even more of "your tax dollars" to make up for a smaller audience.
4 - People whine about the CBC commentators and say they prefer SN or TSN, then whine when CBC isn't televising a game. It seems to me many here just want to whine about CBC for the sake of whining about them. Is it any wonder other teams fans call us Canuck fans whiners?
Next up: more whining about the early game running late.....