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

[Waivers] Bryan Bickell


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Nail3738 said:

I knew that 4 Million dollar contract would bite them in the ass, Bickell was never worth it, lol

 

2 points and a -4 playing with the Hawks - if you can't find any success there, your time in the NHL is probably limited.

Not necessarily... playing on an amazingly deep team like the Blackhawks (or the Canucks circa 2011) allows less window of opportunity for anyone trying to make it beyond their assigned position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MedicineHatCanuck said:

I heard somewhere that this allowed Chicago to have an extra 2 million in cap room

No they only save 950k.

 

Bickell is a terrible player, he isn't NHL caliber and on top of that he doesn't even have the work ethic to somewhat compensate for that either. The Hawks will likely have to pay some rebuilding team some picks in return for taking on the last year of Bickell's contract. Either that or buyout as he is a total waste of space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Me_ said:

Not necessarily... playing on an amazingly deep team like the Blackhawks (or the Canucks circa 2011) allows less window of opportunity for anyone trying to make it beyond their assigned position.

Well that's a pile of crap/excuse.

Panarin,Teravainen are the most recent players to say hello - not to mention I know Garbutt has had the chance to play alongside Toews; They give you the chance there, what they make of it is up to the player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stan Bowman may have won cups with his line up, but he's not a perfect GM that everyone likes to pretend he is.

He traded a 2nd round pick for Rundblad more than a year ago, which ended up not having a single value in a trade AND on waivers, despite being on a cheap, affordable contract.

Bickell is definitely overpaid, but is cheaper than Burrows' contract. Either Chicago has the depth to get rid of a player of his calibre (most likely the case) or it was the type of signing that he shouldn't have signed to begin with (in hindsight).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Stan Bowman may have won cups with his line up, but he's not a perfect GM that everyone likes to pretend he is.

He traded a 2nd round pick for Rundblad more than a year ago, which ended up not having a single value in a trade AND on waivers, despite being on a cheap, affordable contract.

Bickell is definitely overpaid, but is cheaper than Burrows' contract. Either Chicago has the depth to get rid of a player of his calibre (most likely the case) or it was the type of signing that he shouldn't have signed to begin with (in hindsight).

 

Lol? Dumb comment. Id waive anyone multiple times for 3 cups in 6 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Tortorella said:

Lol? Dumb comment. Id waive anyone multiple times for 3 cups in 6 years. 

Was Bickell a huge part of those cups? He certainly was part of it, but could he really have been replaced with someone else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Stan Bowman may have won cups with his line up, but he's not a perfect GM that everyone likes to pretend he is.

He traded a 2nd round pick for Rundblad more than a year ago, which ended up not having a single value in a trade AND on waivers, despite being on a cheap, affordable contract.

Bickell is definitely overpaid, but is cheaper than Burrows' contract. Either Chicago has the depth to get rid of a player of his calibre (most likely the case) or it was the type of signing that he shouldn't have signed to begin with (in hindsight).

 

Not sure if Burrows is the best comparison here (unless you're trying to build a case against Burrows that is....). 

I feel that Higgins is perhaps a better comparison, and also at $1.5 million less on the cap.

                                                regards, G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gollumpus said:

Not sure if Burrows is the best comparison here (unless you're trying to build a case against Burrows that is....). 

I feel that Higgins is perhaps a better comparison, and also at $1.5 million less on the cap.

                                                regards, G.

Burrows/Bickell, if I'm not mistaken, are roughly paid the same amount per year. Burrows is paid slightly more. That's where I meant to compare.

I wasn't meaning to bash Burrows though. Between the two, Burrows is better to have on your team. He's a real 'glue guy'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dazzle said:

Burrows/Bickell, if I'm not mistaken, are roughly paid the same amount per year. Burrows is paid slightly more. That's where I meant to compare.

I wasn't meaning to bash Burrows though. Between the two, Burrows is better to have on your team. He's a real 'glue guy'.

Cool. 

I was looking at the comparison from the perspective of their respective roles and production, at least at the time of when they signed their current deals. Burrows "was" a top-6 guy (or was a guy who performed well in a top-6 role even if he was a top-9 guy, or W/E...). Burrows was being paid for the time of his previous contract(s) where he had one 30 goal season and and got 20+ on three other occasions. That's why he has a $4.5 million cap hit.

Bickell has never broken the 20 goal mark in his pro career. Anywhere (AHL or NHL). Why the Hawks gave him a $4 million cap hit contract is beyond me. Didn't they let some other guys go for cap reasons? 

Higgins is/was a top-9 guy for the Canucks who sometimes was put in to a top-6 role, and was paid accordingly ($2.5 million cap hit). I see his role/production as a better comparable to Bickell. Higgins had 61g and 80a in his time in Vancouver, while Bickell has had 60g and 69a (I believe I added those up correctly). 

                                                      regards, G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...