Prior to 2011 he liked skill. Sundin, Samuellson, Demitra, drafted Hodgson. Its been downhill from there with no end in sight
Richardson ?
Damien Brunner
- Thread starter Kmode
- Start date
Prior to 2011 he liked skill. Sundin, Samuellson, Demitra, drafted Hodgson. Its been downhill from there with no end in sight
Richardson ?
And how is the fact that Clowe did not get a goal before the trade deadline not a deficiency in his game ?
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,049
- 6,615
Yes.
He has more skill on one finger then Clarkson and more skill on one finger nail as Clowe yet he's the one without a contract.
Sad state the NHL is in when drooling dogs outbeat skill by this margin. Maybe Gillis should do what he said he was going to do and lead the league toward a skill game. Rather then copycat the dog game.
I would even go so far as to waive Booth to sign Brunner. He would be similar to the Sammuelson and Demitra signings as far as abilities goes.
Or maybe, it's about who is the better player overall, skill withstanding? Nah.
Samuelsson was better defensively and offered more size than Brunner. Sammy was pretty versatile. Demitra too was pretty reliable defensively. It seems the league rightfully views Brunner as more of a smaller 1way talent.
So you're saying there's no possibility he's just asking for too much money?Brunner has a pretty good playoffs, so I don't think you can truly rule out the fact he's just wanting more money than teams may be willing to dish out to him. It's not like players haven't been paid after having a good playoffs before, most recently, Bryan Bickell, who is making 4M after one good playoffs.
Ward, Joel » $3,000,000 $3,000,000
Its just not fashionable to be signing skill players right now. Skill is cheap. Any smart GM would be buying it while its cheap
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,477
- 8,575
Ward got that contract because he scored like 600 points in that one playoffs and someone got cute.
huntison
Registered User
- Aug 12, 2008
- 4,899
- 30
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
Prior to 2011 he liked skill. Sundin, Samuellson, Demitra, drafted Hodgson. Its been downhill from there with no end in sight
Richardson ?
What does Richardson have to do with Sundin, Demitra, Samuelsson, Hodgson? Richardson is a depth forward, so why is he being compared to the acquisitions of those listed players who are top six players?
Seems like you're just trying to spin Gillis off as a bad GM, more than anything here.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
Finally a lineup with Kassian out of the top six
Yup, good thing. Wasting another year of Kassian developing is always good.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,049
- 6,615
Clowe is a 2way player, and good along the wall. Brunner is not that. Nothing wrong with a small 1way player either, but the teams that signed Clowe and Clarkson prioritized those guys.
Brunner will land somewhere, although I don't think it's a league wide conspiracy that he hasn't to this point.
agree KAssasin is not some plug he has skills plus other thing beside offensive....he should be in the top 6
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
From a Canucks POV, Brunner's defensive liabilities shouldn't even matter. We need some players that are strictly offensively minded. We have plenty of two way forwards, and most teams have a few players like Brunner who aren't great defensively but they work. It's fine to have one player, especially when it's just a winger, that isn't all that great defensively IMO.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
Posters expect Kassian to be a top six forward, but it makes no sense to expect that with him never playing in the top six. Playing fourth line minutes with plugs is just going to make him a plug. You need to give him top six minutes in order to go through those growing pains so he can develop into a top six forward.
I think skill wise, he's a downgrade from Lappy. And Lappys shootout game was coming to form.
Hopefully.
I just don't see any reason why he deserves to be penciled into the top line of every pre-season lineup idea. Just because he was traded for a 4.2 million dollar top 6 player, doesn't mean he is a top 6 player.
Barney Gumble
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2007
- 22,711
- 1
Had to start shaking some of the players with that "rep" (deserved or not - I lean to the later based on his time as Canuck only). Just changing a coach that didn't have alot of discipline from the team (each season had us taking alot penalties even factoring out the schmucks like Sutherland) - isn't enough.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,049
- 6,615
Which is why I'm not totally opposed to bringing him in. He could work here, depending upon the linemates.
I just understand why he wasn't a hot commodity, like Goldrunner seems to think he should have been.
At one point, I wanted Parenteau to be brought in as well.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
I'm moving this discussion to a Kassian thread. So lets go there if you want to debate further.
Well, it's always good to bring in a 1m dollar player when complaining about a fall off in skill. LOL
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,963
- 24,136
A line of Brunner - Kesler - Burrows is a line where Brunner wouldn't be exposed defensively much IMO.
Prior to 2011 he liked skill. Sundin, Samuellson, Demitra, drafted Hodgson. Its been downhill from there with no end in sight
Richardson ?
I agree that Gillis is a buffoon but Richardson looks like a good pickup for the bottom 6.
deckercky
Registered User
- Oct 27, 2010
- 9,379
- 2,452
He's penciled in with the Sedins because the coach told him he's penciled in with the Sedins. It has nothing to do with Hodgson (who amusingly for this conversation earned said $4.2M contract by being thrown on the top line in spite of his liabilities).
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Sedin = 1g, 0a, 1p in 7 games
Sedin = 1g, 3a, 4p in 7 games
Burrows = 2g, 1a, 3p in 7 games
Higgins = 0g, 1a, 1p in 7 games
Kesler = 0g, 1a, 1p in 7 games
Raymond = 0g, 0a, 0p in 6 games
Total top 6: 4g, 6a, 10p in 41 games. 0.24ppg
Hansen = 1g, 2a, 3p in 7 games
Lapierre = 1g, 2a, 3p in 7 games
Torres = 2g, 1a, 3p in 7 games
Total 3rd line: 4g, 5a, 9p in 21 games. 0.43ppg
Toews = 2g, 3a, 5p in 6 games
Kane = 3g, 2a, 5p in 6 games
Sharp = 2g, 0a, 2p in 6 games
Bickell = 1g, 3a, 4p in 6 games
Handzus = 1g, 1a, 2p in 6 games
Hossa = 0g, 2a, 2p in 6 games
Total top 6: 9g, 11a, 20p in 36 games. 0.56ppg
Kruger = 1g, 1a, 2p in 6 games
Bolland = 3g, 2a, 5p in 6 games
Frolik = 0g, 4a, 4p in 6 games
Total 3rd line: 4g, 7a, 11p in 18 games. 0.61ppg
Clearly by looking at the two, the Hawks outplayed our players in the SCF in every facet. But can we please cut out the garbage about our bottom 6 players being the ones letting us down? When our top 6 only score at a 0.24ppg clip in the most important games of their careers, the problem is with them and not the rest of the team.
If it makes you feel better, signing Brunner will bump someone else down and hopefully boost the bottom 6 scoring due to having more talent down there. Of course, signing someone like Brunner should help our top 6 which is the clear issue since, albeit in a limited sample size, he's shown he can put the puck in the net in the playoffs.
I also find it embarrassing that in the SCF our 3rd line can score as many goals as our entire top 6, yet people still think it's our bottom 6 that's the problem. I have excluded the 4th line since it was pretty much a revolving door, but I seriously think that any argument that suggests our 4th line needs to start scoring more and that's the reason we didn't win the Cup should be laughed at, when we see our top 6ers producing like 4th liners.
To wrap it all up, this team very much could use a guy like Brunner. It's not the 4th line that's killing us, it's our top 6 not scoring when we need them to.
It would have been tough to outscore the Bruins in the 4 losses the way the puck was going into the net. We could add 10 goals to the Sedin line and we still lose.
