Halak was 2nd best goalie. Bruce can share some of the blame as well... - boonerbuck
Garland does have decent 5v5 production but how much he tries to do himself is part of the reason why. Not an easy player to play with in your line. I think a guy like Pearson has been more effective
Location: Greetings from the Humungous. Ayatollah of rock and rolla! Joined: 08.15.2014
Mar 28 @ 11:18 PM ET
Shed? That was the best team the Canucks have ever iced. Incredibly hard to play against. I would kill for a team like that today. - bloatedmosquito
While it's a close call I'd go with the 94' club all day twice on Sundays. The 2011 era club had their day which was unreal in 2011 with 55 wins...but I would go to war with the 94' team anyday of the week. The Kesler/Burrows thing was great for awhile but after a bit it just made them look like idiots how they acted on the ice. Plus Luongo was a choker and Maclean wasn't....
Location: Greetings from the Humungous. Ayatollah of rock and rolla! Joined: 08.15.2014
Mar 28 @ 11:20 PM ET
Bruce calling him a puck hog. True dat...
Miller had a poop game as well.
Halak was 2nd best goalie. Bruce can share some of the blame as well... - boonerbuck
One of Boudreau's few coaching errors so far starting Halak. Not sure I agree on Garland though even Shorthouse and Garrett said he looked great. But the one giveaway the coach will always play up...
While it's a close call I'd go with the 94' club all day twice on Sundays. The 2011 era club had their day which was unreal in 2011 with 55 wins...but I would go to war with the 94' team anyday of the week. The Kesler/Burrows thing was great for awhile but after a bit it just made them look like idiots how they acted on the ice. Plus Luongo was a choker and Maclean wasn't....
- LordHumungous
I agree. 94 line up gave it all to the final buzzer in the final game 7... they didn't have the Rangers by the balls and let them slip through their fingers. Not a choker amongst them.
One of Boudreau's few coaching errors so far starting Halak. Not sure I agree on Garland though even Shorthouse and Garrett said he looked great. But the one giveaway the coach will always play up...
Miller took the night off disappointing. - LordHumungous
Garland showed speed but he was running around with the puck not doing (frank) all with it mostly.
4rth round pick... The return is so low that the true value would be to keep him for the playoff push and for the potential playoff games.... even if he walks.
People make it sound like he got a return they couldn't walk away from. Mixed messages on the pick... because if a 4rth is worth that much, why trade a 3rd for a soft fringe defenseman who was a regular healthy scratch? Keep the 3rd and call up Rathbone and give him a shot! It would probably be just the experience he needs to make the club out of camp next season... I mean, trade a 3rd and block a young players chance? Again, mixed messages. - boonerbuck
I gave you a couple of logical reasons. Our 4th line really wasn't as great as you're making it out to be. Rathbone got his shot and actually sucked pretty badly defensively. He's also had a couple of injuries.
So you're basically saying that calling Rathbone up instead of playing an experienced NHL D is fine for our playoff chances? Yet trading a 4th liner, of which we have many, on an expiring contract hurts them. You have to be trolling.
Location: I’m a dose of reality in this cesspool of glee Joined: 10.22.2011
Mar 29 @ 12:00 AM ET
While it's a close call I'd go with the 94' club all day twice on Sundays. The 2011 era club had their day which was unreal in 2011 with 55 wins...but I would go to war with the 94' team anyday of the week. The Kesler/Burrows thing was great for awhile but after a bit it just made them look like idiots how they acted on the ice. Plus Luongo was a choker and Maclean wasn't....
- LordHumungous
What?
The 2010-11 team was the best roster the franchise has ever assembled. They recorded a franchise-best 54-19-9 record, while they scored the most (262) and gave up the least amount of goals against (185). Presidents’ Trophy. Daniel’s Art Ross Trophy and Ted Lindsay. Kesler's Selke Trophy. Burrows' scoring may be the greatest goal in franchise history? Luongo and Schneider won the William M. Jennings.
I can post the regular season stats but it's only more of the same awesome.
I gave you a couple of logical reasons. Our 4th line really wasn't as great as you're making it out to be. Rathbone got his shot and actually sucked pretty badly defensively. He's also had a couple of injuries.
So you're basically saying that calling Rathbone up instead of playing an experienced NHL D is fine for our playoff chances? Yet trading a 4th liner, of which we have many, on an expiring contract hurts them. You have to be trolling. - Load Management
I gave you a couple of logical reasons. Our 4th line really wasn't as great as you're making it out to be. Rathbone got his shot and actually sucked pretty badly defensively. He's also had a couple of injuries.
So you're basically saying that calling Rathbone up instead of playing an experienced NHL D is fine for our playoff chances? Yet trading a 4th liner, of which we have many, on an expiring contract hurts them. You have to be trolling. - Load Management
No, I'm giving examples of the mixed messages coming out of management with their moves at the TDL. Read again.
If dropping everything Motte is was worth a 4rth, then the move giving up a 3rd for Dermott contradicts that. I was pretty clear. Yes that would have meant playing Rathbone and giving him some experience... which to me couldn't be much worse than dumping Motte and bringing in Dermott. Now Dermott will either take a spot from a young player, or his salary will be on the books while he is a healthy scratch next season.
Like Nucker said, it looked foot half in and I agree... in or out... not in between... that is what they past regime was like.
No, I'm giving examples of the mixed messages coming out of management with their moves at the TDL. Read again.
If dropping everything Motte is was worth a 4rth, then the move giving up a 3rd for Dermott contradicts that. I was pretty clear. yes that would have meant playing Rathbone and giving him some experience... which to me couldn't be much worse than dumping Motte and bringing in Dermott. - boonerbuck
I think the message was pretty much right there in your face. Motte isn't worth what he's asking the team to pay him. Rathbone isn't ready yet. Our D depth couldn't sustain trading Hamonic without a replacement.
I think the message was pretty much right there in your face. Motte isn't worth what he's asking for the team. Rathbone isn't ready yet. Our D depth couldn't sustain trading Hamonic without a replacement.
Pretty simple. - Load Management
Motte is under contract for the rest of the season so who cares and yes the 4rth line was more effective than you are giving it credit for. Now it's neutered. If the management is serious about giving these guys a chance to make it, you keep him.
If they are not serious, then why bring in Dermott for a 3rd?
If picks are more important than what Motte brings, why trade away the 3rd for a fringe player?
Conflicting messages as Marwood would say under Benning.
No, I'm giving examples of the mixed messages coming out of management with their moves at the TDL. Read again.
If dropping everything Motte is was worth a 4rth, then the move giving up a 3rd for Dermott contradicts that. I was pretty clear. Yes that would have meant playing Rathbone and giving him some experience... which to me couldn't be much worse than dumping Motte and bringing in Dermott. Now Dermott will either take a spot from a young player, or his salary will be on the books while he is a healthy scratch next season.
Like Nucker said, it looked foot half in and I agree... in or out... not in between... that is what they past regime was like. - boonerbuck
Dermott is controlled, young and can contribute next year. Its not rocket science they said they were looking for dmen 25 and under and found one. Fringe players dont have a couple NHL games experience.
Motte is under contract for the rest of the season so who cares and yes the 4rth line was more effective than you are giving it credit for. Now it's neutered. If the management is serious about giving these guys a chance to make it, you keep him.
If they are not serious, then why bring in Dermott for a 3rd?
If picks are more important than what Motte brings, why trade away the 3rd for a fringe player?
Conflicting messages as Marwood would say under Benning. - boonerbuck
We can get the 3rd back anytime as Dermott is on a cheap expiring contract next year. Much better option than Hamonic.
I liked Motte, but we need to cut salary. Also, dig this, the most games he's played in an NHL season was his first year with the Canucks at 74. The 2nd most is this year at 52. Other than that he averages about 30 games a year. So really, what's being lost?
Dermott is controlled, young and can contribute next year. Its not rocket science they said they were looking for dmen 25 and under and found one. Fringe players dont have a couple NHL games experience. - neem55
We can get the 3rd back anytime as Dermott is on a cheap expiring contract next year. Much better option than Hamonic.
I liked Motte, but we need to cut salary. Also, dig this, the most games he's played in an NHL season was his first year with the Canucks at 74. The 2nd most is this year at 52. Other than that he averages about 30 games a year. So really, what's being lost? - Load Management
What's being lost?
A fast, physical gritty excellent penalty killer who's line was the energy and shutting down the opposition while contributing quite often under Bruce. That's what's lost. Was he injured when they traded him? No. He was healthy and playing very effective.
Needed to cut salary? He is signed to the end of the season, was in under the cap and they had just cleared Hamonic salary. Dermott's salary was half of Hamonic's so they didn't need to cut his salary.
Not injured. Salary wasn't in the way. What a weird argument you just put up.
Dermott is controlled, young and can contribute next year. Its not rocket science they said they were looking for dmen 25 and under and found one. Fringe players dont have a couple NHL games experience. - neem55
You don't know what fringe means regarding hockey players then. Fringe players do play a few games but can't keep their spot in the line up. The actual definition of fringe players...
Remember the Canuck's have Poolman under contract with Rathbone in the pipeline. It's very Benning like to give up a 3rd for a expendable. Dermott's salary may need to be cleared by this summer... that would be very Benning like as well... trading the 3rd for a player the team waives or buries in the minors because of cap problems.
