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

[Trade] Canucks Trade for Dickinson from DAL for a 3rd.


Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, lmm said:

what do you mean by that?

I see he has been a head coach at some levels

but what do you mean "Not a typical assistant"?

and if he is not, will that gel with the current group?

what do you think he brings?

Did you even bother reading about what others have said on him, especially those who clearly have more information?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, lmm said:

Obviously, Jim is adding around the periphery

Jim also resigned Green, not a fan

retained Baumer, not a fan

brought back Clarke, I am a fan,

I see above, someone says Dickinson "makes us hard to play against, the videos I found do not show that

do you have videos of Jason Dickinson being hard to play against?

Convincing John says Dickinson is one dimensional, do you have proof to say otherwise?

Roussell and Beagle are one dimensional, we have a lot of that

 

 

Shaw might well be a good coach, but I see a lot of comments like, "Hopefully he can convince Green to fix the defense" Is that realistic?

Good coach or bad I fear Shaw will be a lone voice in a room full of (not so) old boys

Jimmy McGill says, " maybe JD is not the answer to the 3c problem", so, what is he? Another warm body not quite cast right for the job at hand?

 

Jim said "Bold moves" 

Is this it? or do we trade our first and second to try and scrape into the playoffs again

Awalk (not a friend of mine , nor

 Con Johns as far as I know), says, "The Canucks are always trading future for the present" and I agree with that 

If we are going to trade for a 3c, trade for 2010 Brian Boyle (whoever that might be) If that is Jason Dickinson, great, if not what is the point?

 

Oh. I see. Well what was all that "best friends forever" and "we should start a business together" talk then? 

 

The Rock Reaction GIF by WWE

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, awalk said:

Wasn't that the 4th they used to select Rathbone? 

 

Man I wish they held onto picks more.

No we used our own 4th, but we did trade the San Jose 4th for both of Carolina's 5th and 6th round picks that year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

No we used our own 4th, but we did trade the San Jose 4th for both of Carolina's 5th and 6th round picks that year.

Ahh nice, thank you. I was trying to follow the trade tree and got stuck on where that SJ 4th went.

 

I then went down the rabbit hole of how many picks have gone out vs come back since 2015 and it's not too bad actually... but based on how well this team - finally - drafts, I think it might amplify the want to hold on to picks.

Edited by awalk
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, awalk said:

 

Oh. I see. Well what was all that "best friends forever" and "we should start a business together" talk then? 

 

The Rock Reaction GIF by WWE

aww, you leaked

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lmm said:

So, I watched those vids

on the right side of the puck- check

otherwise a pretty small sample size

here is the guy he needs to be better than

 

You can't just pick Sutter's hat trick for comparison. Compare Sutter's recent numbers to Dickinsons (nevermind the age gap) and get back to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Filthy McNasty said:

I might be bananas but I would rather have Sutter at a reasonable contract at 4c over beagle 

Not crazy at all. Sutter is just as good defensively and is capable of chipping in some goals. Beagle will score three goals in a good year.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

Don't even listen to that tool. He's lying. He's done this to me before and outright admitted he's a loser who does this crap on purpose. Total goof. No idea how he isn't banned.

I've noticed that some of the most obvious trolls don't get warned or banned. It makes me think that they are sportsnet employees in the media and our mods are not allowed to ban them as they work for sportsnet and this site is owned by sportsnet.

 

This despicable troll claims to work in Texas but spends a lot of time on CDC whining. Maybe he is a roving media clown.

 

Also Labamba is a slimy despicable scumbag and a pathetic excuse of a man.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dazzle said:

So, I'm totally shooting in the dark on this one, I guess Dickinson's going to take 18? :ph34r::ph34r:

 

LOL.. Did you twist the brass's arm or something... they have both him and Virt as wearing # 18 on the roster list.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, lmm said:

what do you mean by that?

I see he has been a head coach at some levels

but what do you mean "Not a typical assistant"?

and if he is not, will that gel with the current group?

what do you think he brings?

he's had a good impact on team defensive structure in both St Louis and CBJ. He's also getting into a role where he's going to give input on more than just his narrow alley (e.g., just PK or PP). Thats a bit unusual.

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-travis-green-picks-veteran-coach-brad-shaw-for-critical-role

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

You can't just pick Sutter's hat trick for comparison. Compare Sutter's recent numbers to Dickinsons (nevermind the age gap) and get back to me.

that was kind of my point

I picked the first clip I could find of Sutter and that is what I got

As for Dickinson's vids, he looks good, but not great

so I repeat

I'll wait and see if he blossoms in Vancouver great

if he wilts like Vesey, Boyd, Roussell, not so great

I am absolutely on the fence with this trade

but a team that lacks physicality as ours does, needs to fill that hole with some of these moves

being 6'2" 200# is great , but TGraovac and Bailey are bigger but don't fill that need

 

So, I guess my question is how do you define "hard to play against"?

I posted a vid of him getting laid out by Cale Makar (also the first video I found of JD)

right side of the puck = good

laid out by Makar = soft

that is 1 for 2 in my book

which player willl he be in Vancouver

 

edit, Dazzle defines hard to play against as playing with a bag on his head>>>

Edited by lmm
  • RoughGame 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

he's had a good impact on team defensive structure in both St Louis and CBJ. He's also getting into a role where he's going to give input on more than just his narrow alley (e.g., just PK or PP). Thats a bit unusual.

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-travis-green-picks-veteran-coach-brad-shaw-for-critical-role

 

 

I am not against this move, but it seems it could easily go North or South 

I see the potential for a Benning / Linden type split before the year is out.

Shaw on Baumer:

 With Baumer, I hope to augment him in different ways by getting my point across and not being offensive.

 

We will see

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, gurn said:

Not always.

Burrows traded for pick

Benn      traded for pick

etc.

would you be so good as to expand on that  etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lmm said:

I am not against this move, but it seems it could easily go North or South 

I see the potential for a Benning / Linden type split before the year is out.

Shaw on Baumer:

 With Baumer, I hope to augment him in different ways by getting my point across and not being offensive.

 

We will see

tbh I think its Baumer thats the one at risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, lmm said:

would you be so good as to expand on that  etc?

No, just posting proof it isn't "always" trading futures for  the now.

Edited by gurn
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

tbh I think its Baumer thats the one at risk.

that may well be,

but it has the potential to offset any good that might come from Shaw's arrival.

As I said, I am not against either the Shaw signing or the Dickinson trade,

but if Baumer is part of the problem it could hinder Shaw's impact

what if Green is the problem?

 I see lots of quotes to the effect, "I hope Green listens to Shaw..."

that seems like a really tough situtation to put an assistant coach into

 

Likewise I see some posters thinking Dickinson solidifies the 3c spot while others have him as 2nd LW or 4c

what we need is a 3C, aguy that walks into camp and from day 1 puts Sutter, Beagle, and anyone else who thinks they have a shot on notice, "this is my spot"

We will knw about Dickinson after the first day of camp

 

With Shaw, he needs to come in, make improvements and not rock the boat, or this will go down as another "special year" waisted on infighting

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, lmm said:

that was kind of my point

I picked the first clip I could find of Sutter and that is what I got

As for Dickinson's vids, he looks good, but not great

so I repeat

I'll wait and see if he blossoms in Vancouver great

if he wilts like Vesey, Boyd, Roussell, not so great

I am absolutely on the fence with this trade

but a team that lacks physicality as ours does, needs to fill that hole with some of these moves

being 6'2" 200# is great , but TGraovac and Bailey are bigger but don't fill that need

 

So, I guess my question is how do you define "hard to play against"?

I posted a vid of him getting laid out by Cale Makar (also the first video I found of JD)

right side of the puck = good

laid out by Makar = soft

that is 1 for 2 in my book

which player willl he be in Vancouver

I won't argue anything you said here. Because although this trade looks damn good on paper and IMO Vancouver did well, we won't know until the games are played. Based on the majority of 'proof' provided in this thread I am going into it with a positive attitude. 

 

By the way, this was the first video that came up for me: 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lmm said:

would you be so good as to expand on that  etc?

I will.

 

Since 2014:

 

IN
1st
2nd
2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
3rd
4th
4th
5th
6th
7th
7th
7th
7th
7th


OUT
1st
2nd
2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
5th
5th
6th

 

 

Edited by awalk
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...