DollarAndADream
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2012
- 159
- 46
Not sure about mobile, but on desktop the date is already there.
For a second I thought it was new too, but right underneath the title is the date posted.
Confirmed with Link: (June 26th, 2018) Canucks re-sign D Derrick Pouliot to 1-year Deal ($1.1M AAV)
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
For a second I thought it was new too, but right underneath the title is the date posted.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
God I thought we re-signed him again...
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
Oh yeah I know it's there, but it took extra looking. It's pretty much giving you the full shock and then saying "it was just a prank". You don't prank someone with PTSD. Given the last 5 years even seeing "Confirmed with Link" briefly fills me with dread until I read it, at which point the dread is usually validated and it completely overtakes me.
Pouliot is worse at playing defense than Gudbranson but at least the puck isn’t in our zone sometimes when Pouliot is on the ice.
Gudbranson is a worse player.
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
lol me too. I just logged in and went: "NO. What...? Again?!"
I don't care what his cap hit is, this was a useless signing and can't imagine how anyone objective can see value to his play. Coaches favourite and Del Zottos brutal play included, he has been given a gift in this contract and in his time here, and he has been the worst Canuck in terms of on ice impact I can remember.
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
You know either way it's pretty f***ing depressing when we have to argue which one of our two regulars is the worst player in the NHL
I just want the suffering to end bros
I just want the suffering to end bros
The real scary thing is that Pouliot is far from the Canucks worst d-man. It's just that when he makes a mistake--like getting turnstyled in the Leafs game--it's a whopper that leads directly to a goal.
In terms of zone exits, offensive zone possession numbers and even-strength GA's he's been the best of a generally bad lot of depth d-men. Unfortunately I'm not sure pairing him with Stecher is a great idea for either one of them. I actually thought he played better with Biega. But unfortunately he can't get into the lineup.
Regardless, when Hughes and Juoevi arrive, I'm not sure there's room for either Pouliot or Hutton anyway.
In terms of zone exits, offensive zone possession numbers and even-strength GA's he's been the best of a generally bad lot of depth d-men. Unfortunately I'm not sure pairing him with Stecher is a great idea for either one of them. I actually thought he played better with Biega. But unfortunately he can't get into the lineup.
Regardless, when Hughes and Juoevi arrive, I'm not sure there's room for either Pouliot or Hutton anyway.
Melvin
21/12/05
This is true. Pouliot is pretty terrible but he at least brings something to the table, unlike gudbranson.
Gudbranson gets tougher matchups. Guddy and Hutton go up against stiff competition, Pouliot makes 4th liners look like Gretzky. They both absolutely suck, but Pouliot is worse.
Last edited:
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
Unfortunately some of those passes are good if he's trying to roleplay as Henrik behind our net. The number of times the puck is on his stick and then the other team's in our zone is remarkable.
Gudbranson on the other hand just seemingly engages his cloak in the middle of play and disappears from the game leaving the Canucks shorthanded in their zone.
Gudbranson on the other hand just seemingly engages his cloak in the middle of play and disappears from the game leaving the Canucks shorthanded in their zone.
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
It really is amazing there can even really be an argument that the Canucks have a worse dman than Pouliot. Somehow there is.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
strattonius
Registered User
Gudbranson is awful with the puck but he plays around and behind the net without the puck very well. This is a trait often overlooked by fans. I wont defend Gudbranson further just think he is a better player to have than Pouliot or Del Zotto. Then when you factor in salaries its easy to pile on Guddy.
Melvin
21/12/05
strattonius
Registered User
I think hes strong on the boards and in front of the net. Stipulation is he can never have the puck.
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,444
- 8,531
If he never gets the puck, then he’s not very good at those things in any sort of effective manner.
strattonius
Registered User
That doesn't make sense to me. I'm saying in the boards he can retrieve the puck well; however, its the decision he makes with the puck that is the problem.
You know it's possible to be good without the puck and also bad with the puck, right?
Some of you are like vultures trying to convince me of all Gudbranson's deficiencies as a player.
Gudbranson>Pouliot
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
I won't but I WILL say, that's hardly a high bar to beat (Pouliot - trash that shouldn't be any higher than a #7 on even a bad team). At least Guds is a #6.
Melvin
21/12/05
He's bad without the puck. Very bad. He is out of position a lot, caught flat footed and frequently turnstiled due his poor gap control.
He is one of the worst players in the league with the puck, but he is also very bad without it.
And what good does retrieving the puck do you if you can't do anything with it?
Gudbranson has absolutely earned his atrocious +/- rating. He bleeds goals, bleeds chances and bleeds shots. He is an exceptionally poor player.
