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

[Waivers] 139 players | Jan. 11, 2021 (Eriksson, Baertschi, Brisebois, Graovac, Sautner, Bailey from Canucks)


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Provost said:

Lots of names of older expensive guys being squeezed out.

One off the wall name that I think is really interesting is Jujhar Khaira. 

A local boy who is cheap, tough as nails, and plays all three positions on the 4th line.  He actually seems like a pretty ideal fit as a depth guy who stays on the 23 man roster.  Probably an upgrade on guys like Graovac, Hawryluk, Michaelis, etc.  Would be a huge fan favourite and sell a lot of merch in Surrey.

I watch enough of the Oilers to know this is a bad idea. Trust me. Our kids are way more consistent than him and deserve the look over a guy who is gonna be a career floater between the nhl and the AHL. He brings toughness but not on enough nights. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I think Bailey has waaaaay better hands then Mac.    Just me maybe.

I disagree but it's very close. Mac is a better finisher, but they're both honestly fairly similar players. I want them both in our lineup desperately. It's the look we need for a third or forth line. 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pears said:

Kylington anyone? Gotta get back at Calgary somehow. 

 

23 minutes ago, The Lock said:

He's one I'd be surprised if he doesn't get claimed by someone. I'd personally be really tempted with this.

What's the hype beyond name recognition and being a former 2nd round pick (60th overall)? He doesn't seem very good in his own end and nothing about his game is really anything to get excited about. He played 13+ minutes a night last season for Calgary. He hasn't progressed well to the point that Calgary is willing to put him on waivers to keep Nikita Nesterov instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I think you're missing the point.  What I'm saying is that any move, by any GM, on any team, in any era would have ALWAYS been made for a rational reason AT THE TIME the transaction occurred.  Based on your logic, that would mean that no transaction in the history of sports could ever be called a bad transaction LMAO!

Not at all.   My point remains, at the time the decision made sense.   LOTS of decisions are not logical at the time they are made.     Those are the "bad transactions" out of the gate.   What signing LE a bad decision in hindsight, bet your assets.   Was it bad out of the gate, if your are Sedins/Linden not it was not.   My own personal view is the rookie GM was too deferral to the President and the Sedins - THAT was "bad" but understandable.   

 

Hyperbole on dude, hyperbole on!    :)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crimson said:

Because there is value in being viewed as a decent organization.

Players believe in merit.  No one would hold any assignment for Eriksson against us at this point.  
If we are trying to attract free agents or retain our own players... it is a far better message to say that we have high expectations of them and their teammates. 
I want no part of a player who wouldn’t want to sign because they might get demoted and forced out after four years of not earning their contract.

Right now the rest of the team knows that Eriksson doesn’t deserve to be on the rosters and just cost them being able to keep their friends like Tanev, Markstrom, Tanev, and Stecher.  Eriksson wasting that salary could be the difference between a long playoff run and not making the playoffs.

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Not at all.   My point remains, at the time the decision made sense.   LOTS of decisions are not logical at the time they are made.     Those are the "bad transactions" out of the gate.   What signing LE a bad decision in hindsight, bet your assets.   Was it bad out of the gate, if your are Sedins/Linden not it was not.   My own personal view is the rookie GM was too deferral to the President and the Sedins - THAT was "bad" but understandable.   

 

Hyperbole on dude, hyperbole on!    

Ok, so tell me a transaction you deem to be bad out of the gate at the time when the transaction occurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...