hammertime Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Jennifer Lopez has something to say about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Let's get rid of the dead weight on the pro roster first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 1 hour ago, tas said: it wasn't necessarily a win (other than it allowing the canucks to acquire sutter -- clendening was allegedly a must in that deal -- which allowed them to give horvat sheltered defensive assignments), but it definitely wasn't a loss, either. I did find it odd that Sutter was put with the Sedins at the start of that season, leaving Horvat with the tough defensive duties anyhow (seemed to me it was Horvat sheltering Sutter initially). Unfortunately it also had the effect of Vrbata sulking after losing that perk assignment with the twins (he should’ve been professional about it though) torpedoing his trade value. In the end Sutter ended up playing on 20 games for us that first season thereby really leaving Horvat stuck at the deep end of the pool his rookie season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 2 hours ago, nazzymx said: Why would Vancouver media release this kind of bs?. They are just hurting the Canucks; do you think Dahlen would be happy reading thay they soured on him? smh Listen to the Benning interview on this site. There's precious little to talk about so the media has to create talking points. I take anything Sekeres has to say about the Canucks with a grain of salt. He doesn't like Benning and has a major axe to grind. He thinks that he can affect the opinion of ownership by his own efforts. Such a bag of wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 3 hours ago, HerrDrFunk said: That'd be dumb as hell considering Dahlen has really found his game in the AHL during the last 2 months. Probably looked at Elite Prospects, seen the numbers, and made his stupid assessment about Dahlen. And even then, 29 points in 50 games for a rookie isn't too bad. Especially given his slow start. The Canucks aren't shopping Dahlen any more than they are shopping Boeser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 14 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: Probably looked at Elite Prospects, seen the numbers, and made his stupid assessment about Dahlen. And even then, 29 points in 50 games for a rookie isn't too bad. Especially given his slow start. The Canucks aren't shopping Dahlen any more than they are shopping Boeser. Attention: Canucks shopping Boeser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borvat Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Is 1040 still on the air? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Sekeres isn't all there, is he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toyotasfan Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Gotta put something out there for entertainment like these rumours, but this trade deadline most likely won’t include any Canucks news or transactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rocket Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 follow up tweet by this rat man. You can tell its it’s a troll job because apparently the aspect the Canucks have soured on is his skating? Dahlen has some of the best edge work on the comets. His skating is a strength not a weakness. Just watch him: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 4 hours ago, Tanev said: Matthew Sekeres @mattsekeres Name to keep an eye on with the #Canucksat at #NHLTradeDeadline is prospect W Jonathan Dahlen (acquired from Ottawa for Alex Burrows two years ago). My understanding is Canucks have shopped him, soured on him a bit after seeing him in his first AHL year with @UticaComets. don't buy it at all. He's had a good year and he's starting to play consistently and is playing well atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 30 minutes ago, Screw said: Attention: Canucks shopping Boeser. I'd actually be ok with that, given the right deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borvat Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 23 minutes ago, The_Rocket said: follow up tweet by this rat man. The irrelevant desperate to be relevant. Their listenership (if that's a word) must suck sekerASS. Hey Matt makes a good storyline but radio is a business not about airheads filling the void with baseless crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
on the cycle Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 3 hours ago, gttxc said: You don’t only trade players that suck... Unless you’re just making a comment on his development. I'm confused. I was talking about his development being stunted by Cull, and it not being fair to give up on a guy who's in his first year in North America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Canucks Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 56 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: Probably looked at Elite Prospects, seen the numbers, and made his stupid assessment about Dahlen. And even then, 29 points in 50 games for a rookie isn't too bad. Especially given his slow start. The Canucks aren't shopping Dahlen any more than they are shopping Boeser. This is the most important part. His first few months were definitely slow with him getting used to his first year of pro. But, the last few months his game has very much improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 So, we're going to deal Dahlen before we see his chemistry with Pettersson? Why would we sour on him before giving him a shot with his former linemate? Not opposed to dealing him for the right move but I would've at least called him up to avoid the "if only we put him with Pettersson" thing if he turns out to walk on water with another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 2 hours ago, tas said: it wasn't necessarily a win (other than it allowing the canucks to acquire sutter -- clendening was allegedly a must in that deal -- which allowed them to give horvat sheltered defensive assignments), but it definitely wasn't a loss, either. The Canucks made that Clendening-Forsling swap 6 months before acquiring Sutter. Clendening was most certainly not a deal breaker. The Penguins had to shed cap space. Canucks had also no place on their roster for Clendening with already 6 veteran Ds under contract for the upcoming season. Benning had signed Bartkowski in free agency ahead of the Sutter deal. There was one spot left between Corrado and Clendening and it's Hutton that got that spot with Corrado being waived. Horvat was not sheltered defensively by Sutter. Sutter was brought in as a scoring C that was stuck behind Crosby/Malkin. Horvat was used as the shutdown C. That was even the reason given by WD to play Baertschi with Horvat. He explained that Baertschi wasn't doing anything offensively but he wasn't hurting the team defensively, so he could play him with Horvat to shutdown the other teams top lines until he found his confidence. Once Baertschi got going he broke them up explaining that Baertschi was taking Horvat off his game and that Horvat was better suited to play with defensive wingers. He even started them on separate lines the following season with Horvat between Dorsett-Burrows but was forced to re-unite them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 2 hours ago, aGENT said: I agree very much on the source. But I wouldn't hate the idea if we traded him for a top 4 D prospect or a legit top 6 LW. yeah its like "I'm an insider too!" from 1040. No, no you are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 The Speculation Network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gttxc Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 37 minutes ago, on the cycle said: I'm confused. I was talking about his development being stunted by Cull, and it not being fair to give up on a guy who's in his first year in North America. Huh? I said “unless your just talking about his development “. How does that not address the misunderstanding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.