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

[Signing] Canucks sign Tucker Poolman


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I guess the 12 GM’s who were all chasing Poolman over Hakanpaa don’t share your opinion. 
 

Hakanpaa isn’t even a comparison to Poolman. Luke Schenn is. Canucks got Schenn at half the cost of Hakanpaa which allowed them to sign Poolman. 
 

Poolman played 24:46 minutes in game 3 against Montreal. Highest number of minutes played that game on the entire team. Isn’t Winnipeg a fairly good team? If Poolman is playing more minutes than any other player doesn’t that suggest to you that he may actually be a good player and worth $2.5 million?

 

2287FFA8-7772-4E67-B648-3F402403BF00.png

The Jets were essentially force to play Poolman 20 minutes that series because DeMelo was injured in game 1. Previously, Poolman only averaged 17 minutes a game, in the Oilers series.

 

Edited by shiznak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TmanVan said:

So Hakaanpa is bigger, hits alot more, blocks more shots, plays more minutes, and starts in his defensive zone more often. But Poolmans Corsi is slightly higher, and is generally defensively effective ( a la Chris Tanev). Does that kind of sum it up? 

Hakaanpa played a lot of minutes on a weak Ducks blueline. He averaged 16:21 after being traded to the canes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I guess the 12 GM’s who were all chasing Poolman over Hakanpaa don’t share your opinion. 
 

Hakanpaa isn’t even a comparison to Poolman. Luke Schenn is. Canucks got Schenn at half the cost of Hakanpaa which allowed them to sign Poolman. 
 

Poolman played 24:46 minutes in game 3 against Montreal. Highest number of minutes played that game on the entire team. Isn’t Winnipeg a fairly good team? If Poolman is playing more minutes than any other player doesn’t that suggest to you that he may actually be a good player and worth $2.5 million?

 

2287FFA8-7772-4E67-B648-3F402403BF00.png

I wasn't comparing Hakanpaa to Poolman, someone else was, and what i posted clearly wasn't an opinion, as I was just responding to to the previous post. I literally just posted facts. 

 

Hakanpaa is bigger, had more hits, blocked more shots, Poolman has a better corsi, and seems to be more defensively responsible (Like Chris Tanev). Is any of that untrue?

Edited by TmanVan
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

It’s the Canuck’s home forum.  What kind of response is expected when other teams’ fans cast their lines here?  

Your points just don’t measure up.

Who said anything about fans from other teams? They should be welcome too though.

 

Not every Canucks fan will agree on each move. Yet we see a lot of hate thrown around over every opinion.

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

6 hours ago, flat land fish said:

Montreal’s ample sized D basically carried them to the cup file.  Size doesn’t matter is a myth

Size matters but hockey ability always comes first.

 

See: Gudbranson, Sbisa. From a scouting report perspective, Poolman is a similar player (big, tools, questionable toolbox).

Edited by kanucks25
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • RoughGame 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 204CanucksFan said:

Exactly. I still can't believe how toxic this fan base can be at times. This signing has been ridiculed, torn apart and micro examined to no end in just over 24 hours, meanwhile the Hamonic signing has been mostly lauded and celebrated.

 

Over the last 2 seasons both players put up nearly identical stat lines, but somehow giving Hamonic $3M for 2 years until he's 33 years old is fine but giving Poolman $2.5 for 4 years until he's 32 is a mistake. 

 

I'm not trying to say that this signing is going to be a great one and Poolman is going to out play his contract and make all the haters eat their words. All I'm saying is that this is a pretty low risk signing for a player that, stylistically, is probably the perfect partner for either Rathbone or Juolevi on the 3rd pair.

Poolman has had the equivalent of a cup of coffee in the nhl, while Hamonic aka the harmonica has been around for 10 years. We gave Poolman a 4 year deal at almost the same dollar amount that we gave Hamonic for 2 years. Lets not pretend like its the same thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, coryberg said:

Haven't seen that in any scouting report

And you won’t for this player.  Other teams’ fans are clearly fishing here.  My mouth is sore from so many hooks!  :frantic:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TmanVan said:

I wasn't comparing Hakanpaa to Poolman, someone else was, and what i posted clearly wasn't an opinion, as I was just responding to to the previous post. I literally just posted facts. 

 

Hakanpaa is bigger, had more hits, blocked more shots, Poolman has a better corsi, and seems to be more defensively responsible (Like Chris Tanev). Is any of that untrue?

No that seems about right. :)

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

No that seems about right. :)

Damn it!  Every thread that starts with “signing” and then I see your name I get so excited!!!  Then ... reality :(

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had not looked at Poolman's stats, because was not worried about that part of his game. He was signed to be a stay at home D man. 

He can put up points and many have cherry picked this part of his game.

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=144209

 

He has produced at every level of hockey including the NHL, one year remove of a 16 point 57 game season. 
 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Damn it!  Every thread that starts with “signing” and then I see your name I get so excited!!!  Then ... reality :(

Alf, I take it you watched TP in the playoffs this year?  I haven't seen him play, so I wouldn't judge this trade until I have.  What do you think of the term with this signing?  Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, higgyfan said:

Alf, I take it you watched TP in the playoffs this year?  I haven't seen him play, so I wouldn't judge this trade until I have.  What do you think of the term with this signing?  Why?

You know.  He’s real good.  He’s got a good stick.  He, you know, gets back to pucks.  You know.  Oh you wanted what I think, and not what Benning does.  :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TmanVan said:

Haha early I said this deal could turn ugly and your response was "you could say that about any player!!!"

 

And then I used Panarin as a RANDOM example of the type of player the Canucks could pursue in free agency if they didn't waste money on guys like Beagle and Roussel and your response was "when did Panarin want to play here!?" 

 

I feel like I'm in an argument with my 12 year old brother :lol:

 

Ps- I agree, it's an interesting bet...they obviously see something in him worth while!

just pointing out you can "what if" anything. 

 

Take a look at our current roster, there is very little fat on that lineup. Would another 500-750k change that F group (or d group) by much? nope. 

 

We just don't know if Poolman is overpaid or not. Maybe he is. But maybe its a steal. Its a bet, and kind of a neat one. I do like the Boeser connection to UND. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

You know.  He’s real good.  He’s got a good stick.  He, you know, gets back to pucks.  You know.  Oh you wanted what I think, and not what Benning does.  :lol:

But...uh...you know, the uh 4yr, you know...term?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these folks worried about Poolman and man's probably off enjoying himself in a pool somewhere

 

Dog day's of summer are coming, we can babble about this or that but we simply won't have a solid idea of anything til training camp at the earliest 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Size matters but hockey ability always comes first.

 

fair point 

 

34 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

 

See: Gudbranson, Sbisa. From a scouting report perspective, Poolman is a similar player (big, tools, questionable toolbox).

I don't see the questionable tool box when it comes to Poolman, tho - can you elaborate a bit? If Guddy was even close to him defensively he'd still be here.

 

 

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...