[Trade] Canucks trade Adam Gaudette to Blackhawks for Matthew Highmore

[klw604]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Gaud didn’t accept his role on our team.  He had to go.  Yes, a second rounder would be great, but that clearly wasn’t offered.  

Bad asset management

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, klw604 said:

Age 23

33 points in 59 games

 

 

He had issues with his health, it's not fair to say he has a disease, what type of person are you, an arrogant one...

 

Travis green plays to win, he's coaching to make the playoffs, he doesn't have a contract, he's not gonna use Gaudette on the first two lines, the kid couldn't match up well against other top 6, and he doesn't have enough linemates to help drive play in the bottom 6, our bottom 6 is all defensive minded players

 

He wasn't a fit under Travis green

 

 

Sutter

Beagle

Roussel

Virtanen

Eriksson

Macewan

Motte

Hawryluk

 

Who's your play driver ?

 

 

Gaud didn’t want to play with those players and in that role.  He will soon not be in Chicago too.  He isn’t a top dog.  He needs to accept that fact, or he’s done in the league.  

[higgyfan]

30 minutes ago, klw604 said:

Whoever has the better career wins the trade

 

Highmore 4th liner

Gaudette can play up and down the lineup.....

 

Canucks sold low on Gaudette, terrible asset management

I'm not so sure if we know all the story behind this trade.  It seems odd how quickly it came about.  Makes be wonder if perhaps Gaud asked for a trade, due to the abuse Canuck fans showered on his wife.  Or maybe there was something about Gaud 'bringing' the virus to the team.  None of us have access to that kind of info.

 

It's not that unusual for a player to start with a bang on a new team and then drop back to his usual form after a while.  The way Sam Bennett is playing in Fla, he would have 40g/104 pts in a full season.

[JM_]

20 minutes ago, klw604 said:

Bad asset management

who do you think was going to give us more in return? 

[klw604]

8 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Gaud didn’t want to play with those players and in that role.  He will soon not be in Chicago too.  He isn’t a top dog.  He needs to accept that fact, or he’s done in the league.  

Anyteam that roles 3 offensive forward lines + 1 shutdown line

Will be glad to have Gaudette

 

 

He's getting more minutes with Chicago

 

 

 

 

[coryberg]

1 hour ago, klw604 said:

Correct he's not gonna play ahead of Petey,Bo, and Miller,

But don't trade him for a 4th liner, last year he was worth a second rounder,

 

 

Bad asset management,

Regardless where he plays in the lineup he's worth more then Highmore

Source?

[Gurn]

10 hours ago, Attila Umbrus said:

...I don’t even know what that means lol

It is a reference to an episode of the old "Happy Days" sitcom.

As interest in the show dropped they came up with the idea of having Fonzie acept a dare to go water skiing and jump over a penned up shark.

 

Saying is now used to identify that something is  past it's best before date.

 

[oldnews]

 

5 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I don't think people whose opinions are on either side of this (or any debate really) should be told they are bonkers, or stupid, or an idiot.

Has anyone ever called you any of those things on these boards?

Seriously - just quote one post where any poster refers to you as "bonker, stupid or an idiot."

 

You remind me of Claude Julien in the embellishment city video that makaveli posted. 

 

Do you need to be called names?   Need more attention?   Would that make you feel better if it actually happened - would that make you somehow feel validated? 

 

Btw - here's how you quote a post...

 

Quote

wallstreetamigo

• Canucks Franchise Player
•  
• 
• Members
• 8,258
• 12,137 posts

 

•  

Posted Thursday at 08:50 PM (edited)

 

 

 you &^@#ing clown.

Hmm.  "you &^@#ing clown."    The ironing is delicious.

 

You cry wolf repeatedly but you're not able to refrain from name calling.

 

Nor are you able to quote anyone calling you what you claim - at least certainly not me - I've called you out on this before and crickets from you. 

 

You like to paraphrase liberally, manipulatively, conveniently embellishing what wasn't actually said  - I suppose you think that enables/justifies your own behaviour/name calling.

 

What you've been called - is out.  Called out - on not knowing what a "cap dump" is - continuing to refere to JT Miller as a "cap dump."   Even when it's not you being called out on this point - ie Sekeres in the GDT - you step in and respond - triggered - as if grounds for you to get/feel offended.  Seriously - give it a rest.

 

These are grown up discussion boards - where people will disagree with you - and call you out on things like this.  Evidently your ego is fragile/unable to take it - perhaps not the place for you in that case - no one else's responsibility to kid gloves you because you posture sensitivity - while ironically, name calling yourself.

 

Further irony - you have a one-note, critical default take regarding this team - as once again evidenced by your inability to even assess JT Miller realistically/accurately - but you get triggered when your critical disposition is answered in kind - you call out management in virtually every post you make - but you can't take being called out yourself - can't maintain decorum - and yet here you are continuing to protest as if you've been done wrong on these boards.

 

Seriously - tedious - and something you've done repeatedly - for years - here. 

 

Which is why I've made it clear - repeatedly - that I have and have had little interest in engaging with you - and yet you continued to respond to /engage repeatedly with my posts....and ironically, again, here you are - laughably - protesting as if I'm

not worth responding to....

 

On 5/7/2021 at 3:28 PM, wallstreetamigo said:

 to not be worth reading or responding to for the most part.

Put your money where your mouth is and go your own way, finally.

 

Edited May 8, 2021 by oldnews

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

 

Has anyone ever called you any of those things on these boards?

Seriously - just quote one post where any poster refers to you as "bonker, stupid or an idiot."

 

You remind me of Claude Julien in the embellishment city video that makaveli posted. 

 

Do you need to be called names?   Need more attention?   Would that make you feel better if it actually happened - would that make you somehow feel validated? 

 

Btw - here's how you quote a post...

 

Hmm.  "you &^@#ing clown."    The ironing is delicious.

 

You cry wolf repeatedly but you're not able to refrain from name calling.

 

Nor are you able to quote anyone calling you what you claim - at least certainly not me - I've called you out on this before and crickets from you. 

 

You like to paraphrase liberally, manipulatively, conveniently embellishing what wasn't actually said  - I suppose you think that enables/justifies your own behaviour/name calling.

 

What you've been called - is out.  Called out - on not knowing what a "cap dump" is - continuing to refere to JT Miller as a "cap dump."   Even when it's not you being called out on this point - ie Sekeres in the GDT - you step in and respond - triggered - as if grounds for you to get/feel offended.  Seriously - give it a rest.

 

These are grown up discussion boards - where people will disagree with you - and call you out on things like this.  Evidently your ego is fragile/unable to take it - perhaps not the place for you in that case - no one else's responsibility to kid gloves you because you posture sensitivity - while ironically, name calling yourself.

 

Further irony - you have a one-note, critical default take regarding this team - as once again evidenced by your inability to even assess JT Miller realistically/accurately - but you get triggered when your critical disposition is answered in kind - you call out management in virtually every post you make - but you can't take being called out yourself - can't maintain decorum - and yet here you are continuing to protest as if you've been done wrong on these boards.

 

Seriously - tedious - and something you've done repeatedly - for years - here. 

 

Which is why I've made it clear - repeatedly - that I have and have had little interest in engaging with you - and yet you continued to respond to /engage repeatedly with my posts....and ironically, again, here you are - laughably - protesting as if I'm

not worth responding to....

 

Put your money where your mouth is and go your own way, finally.

 

I have you on ignore bud. Only poster on this site actually. I chose to see this response as I figured it would be directed at me since you can't help yourself.

 

FYI, telling someone they can't comprehend simple concepts - as you do to me frequently - is the same thing as calling them stupid. It doesnt bother me at all though as really it just says more about you than it does me.

 

In your quest to always be right, you have zero ability to consider other people's opinions without trashing them. So I spoke your language and trashed you back now you are enraged and obsessed by it. Boo hoo.

 

For someone who doesnt want me responding to you, you sure do post a lot of responses to me though.

 

This will be the last response you ever get from me so you dont have to worry. I have no time for you.

[oldnews]

29 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

.

I see you're - predictably -  unable to quote anyone calling you what you claim

 

-undoubtedly just more prattle -  so I can't be bothered to read your post / yet more tail chasing.

[Drakrami]

On 5/8/2021 at 3:12 AM, Attila Umbrus said:

Sorry to offend you lol.

 

It's my take, deal with it. I don't care what your thoughts are if you come at me like that.

 

Learn more about the NHL lol. Hilarious. I've travelled all over BC and Alberta watching hockey. Go pound sand. Where do you watch your hockey? Online? 

 

Laughable.

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

[Nucksownyou]

2 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

Yeah, and neither is Gaudette. On a contender, he'd be nowhere near the top six, and we've seen he isn't good enough in the bottom six.

[Gollumpus]

10 hours ago, klw604 said:

Correct he's not gonna play ahead of Petey,Bo, and Miller,

But don't trade him for a 4th liner, last year he was worth a second rounder,

 

 

Bad asset management,

Regardless where he plays in the lineup he's worth more then Highmore

As has already been asked here (but it bears repeating), who suggested that Gaudette was worth a 2nd? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just don't recall anyone mentioning a "credible" source for Gaudette's value being that high.

 

Another thing that comes to mind as I've been scrolling through this thread, is how it jogs the memory of another (former) Canucks pick/prospect from many years ago. There was such a whoop and a holler about how "Cody" (we were all on a first name basis with Cody...) was being failed by the team and "not being given a chance to succeed". When he was traded to Buffalo, screams of bad asset management could be heard. Initially, when Hodgson did well, fingers were pointed and people here were saying that his numbers (while playing with Vanek and Pominville), proved that he was a better player than the Canucks were saying.

 

After a year and a half, Hodgson found himself without his wingers, and his numbers dropped, and then it was Buffalo's turn to be the team which failed Hodgson and not put him in a position to succeed.

 

So, are Gaudette's current results (1g/3a/4pts/-1) an example of a player making the most of his opportunities with his new team, or is he just playing with a bit more drive and that energy will wear down as the games go by, is he just on a hot streak, or is it that he is just being carried by his new line mates? I don't see him being given a huge amount of ice time in Chicago compared to here (for the most part kind of similar to here - 11ish minutes). And when some of the guys on the injury list come back (later this year of next), who sees Gaudette playing ahead of some of them. My suspicion is that Gaudette will once again find himself somewhere in the bottom-6.

 

                                           regards,  G.

[J-P]

2 hours ago, filthycanuck said:

He didn't say he deserved top minutes. Gaudette just was never given an oppurtunity to play up the lineup and I could understand that. Why is it that when someone is injured in the top 6, Jake the rapist is automatically slotted in. Thats my beef with it. Jake has played stretches of games in the top 6 and yet Gaudette has what? Probably a handful of shifts in the top 6 his entire Canuck career. Jimmy Vesey, first game as a Canuck, top line. Josh Leivo, first game he was in the top line. It seems that he's just been pegged as a bottom 6 guy and Green never had an inkling of thought of even trying to play him up the lineup regardless of performance (last season). Jake as awful this year and hes gotten full streak of games in the top 6

You're not given opportunities in the NHL, that's not how it works. You take them. 

 

I know people keep mentioning his 33 point season but 12 points where on PP2 and the remaining 21 in a very sheltered 3rd line role while being a defensive liability is not that impressive. 

 

Guess we'll see if he sticks with the hawks top 6 or not over time.

 

 

[Attila Umbrus]

9 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

That’s just it, that’s where I get my information from. I am willing to listen to another point of view. But you literally just come out and call me an idiot right away lol. Like seriously is this how you talk with everyone, smug as &^@# know it all? 

 

I’ve watched all lot of friggin hockey over my years. And a lot of the young guys I watched have made it to the nhl. I’ve evaluated lots of players that haven’t made it that I thought would too! Success and failure, it’s how you learn and grow you know...But over the years I have seen what does and does not make it from junior ranks all the way to the nhl. I pay attention to that trend. Why does that player make it over another? Etc etc. I am not an analytics guy. This is where I form my opinion from. I ain’t perfect but no one is.
 

Just because I look at a player a different way does not mean I’m wrong or right. It’s my opinion, and you have shown zero interest in that...Only wanting to seemingly call me an idiot. This is how I look at hockey, this is what I know, this is the game I love and have followed religiously for 30 years. You can’t just take that away from me and say I know nothing and your holy ass is right. You say I gave zero info to back myself up... yet you have returned nothing other that $&!# flinging comments to me, so you are also not responding with a valid point...so that I find hypocritical and hilarious.

 

Anyways go ahead, pump your chest and say you’re right. But do me a favour if you choose to talk to me next time, do it constructively and without your finger pointing in my face saying haha yer and idiot. Cause that isn’t a valid point either you twerp. It does nothing for your supposed counter argument.

 

Good day to you

[tas]

it's so weird that people on here get more attached to the players than the guy who drafts and develops them and whose career depends on their success. 

 

benning didn't invest 6 years worth of resources into gaudette only to dump him on a dismissive whim. 

[oldnews]

11 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

terrible take.

When you name a player like Motte as if he's not good enough for the bottom six of a contender - and then pretend that's based on 'learning' as opposed to merely your weak, one-liner opinion - you have no basis to be soapboxing about te inability to respond to 'valid points'. 

 

Tell us about these alleged Stanley Cup bottom sixes you've learned so much about.

 

[I noticed you didn't throw Jay Beagle into your mix....]  Is he good enough for a Stanley Cup bottom six?  

[Attila Umbrus]

14 minutes ago, oldnews said:

terrible take.

When you name a player like Motte as if he's not good enough for the bottom six of a contender - and then pretend that's based on 'learning' as opposed to merely your weak, one-liner opinion - you have no basis to be soapboxing about te inability to respond to 'valid points'. 

 

Tell us about these alleged Stanley Cup bottom sixes you've learned so much about.

 

[I noticed you didn't throw Jay Beagle into your mix....]  Is he good enough for a Stanley Cup bottom six?  

I like that he brings up his mom and how she apparently ignores him and his facts...says enough for me  

[iinatcc]

On 5/8/2021 at 2:52 PM, Attila Umbrus said:

....I don’t even know what that means lol

 

Listen I get that no one is a fan of losing Gaudette for this guy. But I honestly do like his overall game better than Gauds. 
 

Too many times I’ve watched gauds just float around out of position. Then score a goal here and there and Celly! Hard. That’s about it. Him and Jake both frustrate me to no end. Good shot and can score goals here and there, but there is the rest of the game to play away from the net, and they both concern me with their lack of awareness in that department.
 

This is my opinion of course but it’s just my overall feeling when watching and evaluating players. I get that people disagree, I’m ok with that. But don’t call me bonkers just because I think the way I do. I see what I see and am willing to discuss it, others will see what they see and I’m willing to listen and learn if possible if the point is solid. I don’t want to say “I’ve been watching hockey for 30 years” as that’s not much of an argument. But what I do know is I’ve watched a ton of junior, ECHL, AHL, and nhl games all live and in person. I love hockey, I travel for work and am on the road. I catch games live where I can...I guess not since COVID tho lol. Anyways this is where I form my opinions from. Not just out of thin air.

 

Honestly I think we should have had both Jake and gauds brought up thru the AHL. We fast tracked both of them and I do think we hurt their growth. 
 

I hope gauds gets a chance to gel and become a better player in Chicago. But he ain’t ours anymore so I’m focusing on Highmore to see what he brings to the table. I guess I’m an ‘intangibles’ guy, and there is a lot to like in that department with Highmore. 

A lot to take in here but let me just say I will not compare Gaudette with Virtanen ... at least not yet. Gaudette's 2nd full season got him 33 points so there is still a lot of room to grow, I think Jake Virtanen is going to be who he is right now.

 

The thing about Highmore is that he ceiling seems to be at being a 4th line player. Which is fine but trading away a potential Top 9 (or even Top 6) forward for a 4th line player is not good asset management in management's part. Ok one might say Benning had to sell low because Gaudatte probably asked for a trade and the looming expansion draft, then again we need to ask why did Gaudette ask for a trade? Why was he unhappy in Vancouver? 

 

I guess it all boils down to asset management ... remember this is the player that Pierre Maguire told Canucks fans we should be excited about during a TSN interview. Going from that to this point just feel demoralizing as a Canucks fan. 

[Me_]

12 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

Throwing your mom under the bus.

 

Class.