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

[Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

On ‎22‎.‎02‎.‎2016 at 11:39 PM, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow, overreaction much everyone?   This is a good trade based upon organizational need and given that HS had a "work ethic" issue, character likely also played a role.  Granlund has exceeded his draft position and is good in the circle which few of Canuck prospects or regulars can say.  

 

Go ahead and quote this post but in two years, HS will not be in NHL and Granlund will be a solid regular.

Still the best post at this thread. And yes that's it..:emot-parrot:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theminister said:

Why didn't that link embed?

 

What did I do wrong?

Ever since twitter changed their 'copy link' format, you have to paste their copied link in to a new tab, wait for it to load, then copy that url. It's a PITA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund
12 hours ago, Cocolocci said:

Still the best post at this thread. And yes that's it..:emot-parrot:

...and still 5 months earl.

 

3 hours ago, J.R. said:

Ever since twitter changed their 'copy link' format, you have to paste their copied link in to a new tab, wait for it to load, then copy that url. It's a PITA.

Just copy the link location from the time/date/year in the tweet and it pastes in fine.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Didn't someone say on the unpopular opinion thread that Gillis wasn't really that bad? :lol:

I dunno.  Shinkaruk was a late round pick - low percentage odds from the get-go.

Expecting that he made much of guys like Shinkaruk, Jensen, etc is perhaps a stretch.

Still though, he did have a few hits - one still with us in Hutton, and imo Gaunce was a good pick that stands to be a solid NHLer.  Cassels, if not seriously hampered by injuries, could be a different player today, Subban still has a shot - really, his drafting improved as his hold on the franchise deepened.

And where he may not have drafted very well, he hit some home runs in the undrafted free agent market - Tanev, Lack.

But what's more important imo were the tweaks he made that put the Canucks into contention - deals like the Higgins trade, Ehrhoff deal, Hammer signing - Gillis definitely batted at a very acceptable average - and really, he wasn't bad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I dunno.  Shinkaruk was a late round pick - low percentage odds from the get-go.

Expecting that he made much of guys like Shinkaruk, Jensen, etc is perhaps a stretch.

Still though, he did have a few hits - one still with us in Hutton, and imo Gaunce was a good pick that stands to be a solid NHLer.  Cassels, if not seriously hampered by injuries, could be a different player today, Subban still has a shot - really, his drafting improved as his hold on the franchise deepened.

And where he may not have drafted very well, he hit some home runs in the undrafted free agent market - Tanev, Lack.

But what's more important imo were the tweaks he made that put the Canucks into contention - deals like the Higgins trade, Ehrhoff deal, Hammer signing - Gillis definitely batted at a very acceptable average - and really, he wasn't bad.

 

Gillis wasn't good. He was great early! To me anyway.

 

Still made some questionable moves.  ie Mitchell, Ballard. No GM has a perfect track record.

 

But zero question He had his hand firmly on the pulse. Dimitra & Sundin deals may not have been completely worth it? But each had its place and advanced our cause. Sundin's pact announced to the world we were ''players!" It set the tone for us to be aggressive, and other opportunities surfaced, and players bought in. Deals like Ehrhoff, Malhotra, Torres were as, if not more spot on than Higgins? Hamhuis... Malhotra and Torres added such an added presence of size, speed and defensive thrift up front to Burrows, Kes & Hansen. It was trend-setting at the time.

 

Did he keep his hand on the pulse? It is hard to make a case that he did. Dunno? Maybe it was the rumored, ''he wanted to rebuild'' but was not allowed? Rumoured Aqua intervened & hired numbskull Torts? Even if those rumors are true? He was still no longer firmly at the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oldnews said:

I dunno.  Shinkaruk was a late round pick - low percentage odds from the get-go.

Expecting that he made much of guys like Shinkaruk, Jensen, etc is perhaps a stretch.

Still though, he did have a few hits - one still with us in Hutton, and imo Gaunce was a good pick that stands to be a solid NHLer.  Cassels, if not seriously hampered by injuries, could be a different player today, Subban still has a shot - really, his drafting improved as his hold on the franchise deepened.

And where he may not have drafted very well, he hit some home runs in the undrafted free agent market - Tanev, Lack.

But what's more important imo were the tweaks he made that put the Canucks into contention - deals like the Higgins trade, Ehrhoff deal, Hammer signing - Gillis definitely batted at a very acceptable average - and really, he wasn't bad.

 

Horvat?

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...