[Signing] Canucks sign Tucker Poolman

[therodigy]

2 minutes ago, IRR said:

I think he will be solid, especially with Shaw here now.....and honestly, that's all he needs to do i think. Just quietly go about playing solid defense and if there's more there, great! 

I agree. Contrary to popular belief, $2.5M is a fair price for a solid, reliable 3rd pair who can also play dependable PK minutes. If he surpasses that and provides top 4 quality minutes, that's gravy!

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Don't ever change Alf 

Only my Depends, which is quite often in a thread as good as this!  

[Cat Man]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

The point is: Schmidt as a single entity is wasteful and not necessarily a good thing to keep in the lineup. If the rumours are true, he wants out, so why keep him if he doesn't want to be there? If there's an offer available, just take it and cut your losses as much as possible. Fortunately WIN came in and got a deal done. Both teams basically win. I would argue that Winnipeg won more than Vancouver, but that is a minor point.

Schmidt a LD at 4 years at 5.9 per WHO WANTS OUT

                  or

Hamonic a RD at 2 years at 3 per back to mentor QH

                 AND

Poolman a RD at 4 years at 2.5 per on his first big contract with a young team and his old mate BB.

 

We saved 400K this year alone and got two players. Looks and feels like a win to me. 

[TheRussianRocket1994]

4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

And avoid reading the forums on Canucks.com, Tucker. 

Lol! Right! I acknowledge my part in the craziness sometimes, but the unjustified hate and negativity towards the team, gm & players sometimes is too much. I'd have to find it, but i believe Bieksa even mentioned it in a interview recently.  

[Master Mind]

6 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

I'll trust Shaw's judgement over some random on the internet who can't stop whining about literally every move Benning makes.

I don't have a problem with Shaw's judgement or Poolman, it's the contract I don't like.

 

Regardless, this is what I find to be unnecessary for having a different opinion:

 

Quote

I seriously want to get his jersey now thanks to the idiots whining about him.

 

 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

12 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

I've challenged many different posters on various topics. I am not purely anti-Benning. Check my entire post history if you doubt me. Funny that you call me disingenuous...

 

What specifically are you expecting me to challenge? I agree with the critics on Poolman. I've followed his career and watch him regularly, and I don't think he is worth his contract. Yet "Whiners" and Idiots" has been thrown around on a number of occasions for simply having this mindset.

There was a time when you were allowed to have differing opinions or utilize research or facts to make points or cases for or against certain topics. Not sure why you are being crapped on by some here. Respect thoughts on the player. I think ( says the part time custodial engineer haha ) he can bring value to the team, but was thrown at first by the name and values given.

[Dr. Crossbar]

6 minutes ago, IRR said:

I think he will be solid, especially with Shaw here now.....and honestly, that's all he needs to do i think. Just quietly go about playing solid defense and if there's more there, great! 

I think some are really underestimating what Shaw will bring to this team or even forgetting that we signed him. Having a guy like that on our staff will be in many ways transformative, improve defensive accountability, help us get to the next level, and improve the overall decision-making process.

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

I don't have a problem with Shaw's judgement or Poolman, it's the contract I don't like.

 

Regardless, this is what I find to be unnecessary for having a different opinion:

 

 

 

Never specifically called out you or anyone else.  If you think it applies to you, so be it.

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

I think some are really underestimating what Shaw will bring to this team or even forgetting that we signed him. Having a guy like that on our staff will be in many ways transformative, improve defensive accountability, help us get to the next level, and improve the overall decision-making process.

And getting guys who fit the system he wants to run can only help.  Happy he was consulted; this is the kind of communication that helps avoid mistakes like Garrison, Schmidt, and Ballard.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

I think some are really underestimating what Shaw will bring to this team or even forgetting that we signed him. Having a guy like that on our staff will be in many ways transformative, improve defensive accountability, help us get to the next level, and improve the overall decision-making process.

Totally agree! Just like a reg job...some managers can bring the best out of you / the team and others can sink it. It can be like night & day. It will prob have nothing but a pos effect. 

[Master Mind]

6 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Many people have questioned the move. Not all of them have been challenged. The ones who seem to get quoted are the ones with a history of negativity and the ones who refuse to acknowledge points being made.

 

Anyone can stat gaze. A lot of posters here look beyond that to factors in why he was targeted by us and why he took so long to establish himself. You know, like actual fans.

 

I called you disingenuous when you were wilfully ignoring points that I was making.

Well I'm getting quoted often enough, do you consider me in that camp?

 

Anyone not liking Poolman due to his offensive stats are not seeing the bigger picture here, I agree. However, there are going to be many people with little knowledge of the player who support or don't support the move, regardless of their fandom.

[Master Mind]

2 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Never specifically called out you or anyone else.  If you think it applies to you, so be it.

I merely said I find that kind of divisive language unnecessary, regardless of who it's applied to.

 

A user earlier in the thread mentioned the toxicity around here, and I believe those type of posts to be large contributing factor.

Edited July 31, 2021 by Master Mind

[Master Mind]

9 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

There was a time when you were allowed to have differing opinions or utilize research or facts to make points or cases for or against certain topics. Not sure why you are being crapped on by some here. Respect thoughts on the player. I think ( says the part time custodial engineer haha ) he can bring value to the team, but was thrown at first by the name and values given.

Likewise I respect your thoughts on the player (or any other).

 

I hope he is a great addition and can solidify our blueline. We'll see how it goes!

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, Master Mind said:

I merely said I find that kind of devise language unnecessary, regardless of who it's applied to.

 

A user earlier in the thread mentioned the toxicity around here, and I believe those type of posts to be large contributing factor.

Personally I consider it necessary when the same posters can't understand that we paid market value for one of the better options available.

[RWMc1]

6 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Well I'm getting quoted often enough, do you consider me in that camp?

 

Anyone not liking Poolman due to his offensive stats are not seeing the bigger picture here, I agree. However, there are going to be many people with little knowledge of the player who support or don't support the move, regardless of their fandom.

I have no idea how other posters regard you. I don't think that I challenged you on your opinion of Poolman. If I did, please quote me and we can go from there.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

Just now, King Heffy said:

Personally I consider it necessary when the same posters can't understand that we paid market value for one of the better options available.

This! Those same posters can't even look in the mirror, take responsibility and change. So thick they don't listen to anyone / hear anything. Just beat the same negative narrative to death. When you try to reason / give them facts, they don't want to hear it, therefore harsher response ensue. 

[RWMc1]

6 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

I merely said I find that kind of devise language unnecessary, regardless of who it's applied to.

 

A user earlier in the thread mentioned the toxicity around here, and I believe those type of posts to be large contributing factor.

Labelling optimistic posters is also divisive. Where are you when negative posters do that?

[6YPE]

I think you guys went a little off topic huh?? 

[AV.]

2 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Labelling optimistic posters is also divisive. Where are you when negative posters do that?

Thing is, one could be optimistic and supportive without the need to stick it to a group they disagree with.

 

If somebody wants a Poolman jersey, awesome.  In this case, the person wanted to get one to "shut up the idiots" or something alone those lines.  Bit of a difference in intention there, IMO.

[RWMc1]

2 minutes ago, AV. said:

Thing is, one could be optimistic and supportive without the need to stick it to a group they disagree with.

 

If somebody wants a Poolman jersey, awesome.  In this case, the person wanted to get one to "shut up the idiots" or something alone those lines.  Bit of a difference in intention there, IMO.

Nice tangent. I was asking specifically about mm"s responses to "divisive" language. If he doesn't challenge divisive language aimed at optimistic posters, then mm is a hypocrite.