Player Discussion Waiver wire

[adamzilla]

Obviously you have to defend,but since the introduction of the obstruction rule..the game has sped up.

Obstruction hasn't been a thing since 2002.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

First of all, green uses sutter to shelter other players because of their defensive issues. While I'm not a big fan of sutter, he is definitely better than the plugs Gaunce got stuck with.

Now, you made a lot of excuses for Granlund...are you trying to say Grandlund is also fragile or injury prone? That excuse wouldn't fly with you if I was talking about Gaunce and injuries, so spare me the sob story.

When you say 'awarded' you are implying that Granlund earned his spots on the top line and PP. Are you insinuating that he actually deserved that ice time? Does being a coach's pet validate top line minutes or the PP? Wording is important so saying Granlund was 'awarded' prime ice time means he earned it and you know he sure as hell didn't play well enough to warrant top line minutes and PP. He was 'gifted' the ice time because Willie liked him. I'm not the biggest fan of Green, but I think he's definitely a tier above WD. I think you'd have to agree with this, so why hasn't Green given Granlund prime minutes after he started coaching this team? He watched the tapes and had a chance to see him in preseason, throughout all the practices and games... we were struggling to score! He had a top line player at his beck and call... Maybe, just maybe, Granlund never actually earned the prime time minutes he was GIFTED under WD.

Adding bennbrod's acquisitions this summer won't do squat in terms of winning and goals for this season. Why waste the cap space and give extended terms for the 4th line role when we already have the same type players in the system? You really think adding Beagle and Schaller will make a difference? We have more importants needs that need to be addressed, upgrading the 4th is like putting a bandaid on a papercut while you're hemorrhaging from a gunshot to the chest.

Give your head a shake! We have one of the most expensive 4th lines in the NHL! This was not an issue for us, scoring from our top 3 lines and D was the main issue... and you want to sit on your blaming throne and point fingers at Gaunce for lack of scoring and ignore his defensive attributes he brought to the games. Preventing goals is just as important to win games... everyone struggled to score last year FFS! Only a few players were able to suppress goals against like Gaunce did.

Your last paragraph shows that you have no clue about maximizing cap space for draft picks. It's not about being under the cap and players contracts running out. It's about loading up on draft picks by acquiring unwanted players with high cap hits on other teams.

And you have no clue if Sutter will get traded, Edler, MDZ, etc. This mgt ALWAYS screws up and makes the wrong decisions. This type of prophecy defense is so blatently weak and futile, it's like your grasping because you got nothing else. Same stupid prophecy defense I heard on cdc about the Miller signing. I doubted Linbenn were qualified for the job and able to do it at a mediocre level. The Miller signing confirmed it and after a load of arguments and bs excuses, everyone...and I literally mean everyone on that site...said it was great because linbenn would trade him for picks later. Guess what happened...

So take your crystal ball elsewhere and look at facts instead of fortune-telling about future hypotheticals.

Who were the plugs that Gaunce got stuck with..?..In most hockey circles,he would be considered the plug.

To my knowledge the Sedins really liked playing with Granlund..He demonstrated that he had an offensive flair and could produce..When Green became coach,Granlund was deployed in a shutdown role..It was a shitty season for him,and the fact that he needed wrist and ankle surgery is no lame excuse.

Completely agree that WD was a crap coach.

I do think that adding Beagle and Schaller will make a difference...Its an upgrade on what we had...Do I like the term and salary they got..no...Will it harm our cap structure down the road..I don't think so.

Gaunce had the job of clearing the puck out of our zone and getting off the ice..Thats it...All i'm saying is that he didn't have enough facets to his game to keep him in the NHL

I will wrap this up with this...Gaunce was never in the Canucks plans for this season,and the fact that he was only given 2 pre-season games confirms this ..Even in those 2 games,he displayed nothing..Conversely,you look at a guy like Tyler Motte,he took the ball and ran with it.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Obstruction hasn't been a thing since 2002.

Hockey has changed...
-the removal of the red line has increased the speed of the game
-plodding d-man are practically obsolete
-as are players who are designated fighters
-the skill level is off the charts.the game is faster than its ever been....due to coaching,technology,annalytics.

 

[Peter10]

Granlund having offensive flair? Oh boy, its getting better and better. He was a bottom 6 guy in terms of points per 60 (213th of player with 20 or more games) and thats with a crazy high shooting percentage for him - roughly 50% better than his career average

 

[nuck luck]

Who were the plugs that Gaunce got stuck with..?..In most hockey circles,he would be considered the plug.

To my knowledge the Sedins really liked playing with Granlund..He demonstrated that he had an offensive flair and could produce..When Green became coach,Granlund was deployed in a shutdown role..It was a ****ty season for him,and the fact that he needed wrist and ankle surgery is no lame excuse.

Completely agree that WD was a crap coach.

I do think that adding Beagle and Schaller will make a difference...Its an upgrade on what we had...Do I like the term and salary they got..no...Will it harm our cap structure down the road..I don't think so.

Gaunce had the job of clearing the puck out of our zone and getting off the ice..Thats it...All i'm saying is that he didn't have enough facets to his game to keep him in the NHL

I will wrap this up with this...Gaunce was never in the Canucks plans for this season,and the fact that he was only given 2 pre-season games confirms this ..Even in those 2 games,he displayed nothing..Conversely,you look at a guy like Tyler Motte,he took the ball and ran with it.

Are you suggesting that the players on the 4rd line are better than players on the 3th? I thought not. Gaunce had only played with 4th line players and he was still doing his job well of supressing goals. Granlund was paired with better players on the 3rd and was not productive AND, as you stated, very injury prone. In most hockey circles, a majority of the 4th line players are considered plugs. Since we already have a defensively responsible 'plug' on our 4th (on a cheap contract), why replace him with another plug on a high-priced extended contract? Results at the end of the year will not change from last season, unless you truly believe our 'new' 4th line will turn the tides and finally provide us with so much 'winning'. Wouldn't it be wiser to replace a plug like Granlund on the 3rd line for someone who can actually play and be productive...oh, and isn't injury prone.

To my knowledge, the Sedins are 'team first' kind of guys and not put blame elsewhere and take it on themselves. It is not in their DNA to complain about a coach's decision or another player's inabilities. So, if you are getting your 'knowlege' from footage of the Sedin's interviews, I would not consider that 'knowledge' true and lean more towards the Sedin's being professionals and doing their job as leaders.

This team is struggling to score, fair statement? We struggled to score last year and obviously this preseason, correct? If Green had ANY inkling that Granlund could produce or was capable of it than he would have put him on our top lines or even 2nd lines...and PP. There is no way he would bury a top line player on the 3rd and relegate him to a shutdown role when we're struggling to score. It's laughable that you're trying to say that Granlund's shutdown game was so elite that Green wouldn't put him on the top lines. Are you serious with this crap? We all watch and see the games, Granlund never deserved the prime minutes and he still doesn't...he is a 3rd line plug that should be moved for a more productive 3rd line player. I guarantee that this will help the team a lot more than replacing Gaunce on the 4th.

This summers acquisitions won't have any effect on our results and you know it. When you watch the games last season, you honestly thought that if we improved our 4th line than our results would be different? I call BS if you say this was what you saw. So, why fix a papercut when we're hemorrhaging from our scoring deficiencies and awful D? It makes no F'n sense!

It's the opportunity costs that's hurting us with bennbrod and their contracts! It is the OPPORTUNITY that we miss when all our cap space is tied up... the opportunity being extra draft picks!

I would have ended it with a lesson in basic economics, but I need to reference your last paragraph. Again, I don't understand how you can ignore everything that doesn't support your ideology. Motte earned his opportunity no doubt! However, NOBODY had even given the guy a second thought prior to the preseason. Motte advancing was not preordained by anyone who makes decisions on this team. Are you insinuating that he was predestined to advance and that's why Gaunce was never in the canuck's plans...hence the two preseason games he got? Regardless, Motte has nothing to do with Gaunce, he advanced by earning himself the chance. However, there are PLENTY of players on the canucks who DID NOT deserve to be gifted a spot on the team ahead of Gaunce, Archie too. To make this short, what has Schaller accomplished or shown in this preseason to earn a spot over Gaunce or Archie? Other than being a bennbrod acquisition, has he proven himself?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Are you suggesting that the players on the 4rd line are better than players on the 3th? I thought not. Gaunce had only played with 4th line players and he was still doing his job well of supressing goals. Granlund was paired with better players on the 3rd and was not productive AND, as you stated, very injury prone. In most hockey circles, a majority of the 4th line players are considered plugs. Since we already have a defensively responsible 'plug' on our 4th (on a cheap contract), why replace him with another plug on a high-priced extended contract? Results at the end of the year will not change from last season, unless you truly believe our 'new' 4th line will turn the tides and finally provide us with so much 'winning'. Wouldn't it be wiser to replace a plug like Granlund on the 3rd line for someone who can actually play and be productive...oh, and isn't injury prone.

To my knowledge, the Sedins are 'team first' kind of guys and not put blame elsewhere and take it on themselves. It is not in their DNA to complain about a coach's decision or another player's inabilities. So, if you are getting your 'knowlege' from footage of the Sedin's interviews, I would not consider that 'knowledge' true and lean more towards the Sedin's being professionals and doing their job as leaders.

This team is struggling to score, fair statement? We struggled to score last year and obviously this preseason, correct? If Green had ANY inkling that Granlund could produce or was capable of it than he would have put him on our top lines or even 2nd lines...and PP. There is no way he would bury a top line player on the 3rd and relegate him to a shutdown role when we're struggling to score. It's laughable that you're trying to say that Granlund's shutdown game was so elite that Green wouldn't put him on the top lines. Are you serious with this crap? We all watch and see the games, Granlund never deserved the prime minutes and he still doesn't...he is a 3rd line plug that should be moved for a more productive 3rd line player. I guarantee that this will help the team a lot more than replacing Gaunce on the 4th.

This summers acquisitions won't have any effect on our results and you know it. When you watch the games last season, you honestly thought that if we improved our 4th line than our results would be different? I call BS if you say this was what you saw. So, why fix a papercut when we're hemorrhaging from our scoring deficiencies and awful D? It makes no F'n sense!

It's the opportunity costs that's hurting us with bennbrod and their contracts! It is the OPPORTUNITY that we miss when all our cap space is tied up... the opportunity being extra draft picks!

I would have ended it with a lesson in basic economics, but I need to reference your last paragraph. Again, I don't understand how you can ignore everything that doesn't support your ideology. Motte earned his opportunity no doubt! However, NOBODY had even given the guy a second thought prior to the preseason. Motte advancing was not preordained by anyone who makes decisions on this team. Are you insinuating that he was predestined to advance and that's why Gaunce was never in the canuck's plans...hence the two preseason games he got? Regardless, Motte has nothing to do with Gaunce, he advanced by earning himself the chance. However, there are PLENTY of players on the canucks who DID NOT deserve to be gifted a spot on the team ahead of Gaunce, Archie too. To make this short, what has Schaller accomplished or shown in this preseason to earn a spot over Gaunce or Archie? Other than being a bennbrod acquisition, has he proven himself?

Some of your observations are just plain weird.......I don't have a clue what you are babbling about...Motte..?..

So who did not deserve to be 'gifted ' a spot on the Canucks ahead of Gaunce?

 

[F A N]

This team is struggling to score, fair statement?

Given that you posted this after the season opener, no that is not a fair statement.

We struggled to score last year and obviously this preseason, correct? If Green had ANY inkling that Granlund could produce or was capable of it than he would have put him on our top lines or even 2nd lines...and PP. There is no way he would bury a top line player on the 3rd and relegate him to a shutdown role when we're struggling to score. It's laughable that you're trying to say that Granlund's shutdown game was so elite that Green wouldn't put him on the top lines. Are you serious with this crap? We all watch and see the games, Granlund never deserved the prime minutes and he still doesn't...he is a 3rd line plug that should be moved for a more productive 3rd line player. I guarantee that this will help the team a lot more than replacing Gaunce on the 4th.

If Granlund is a 3rd line plug, don't you want to move him to the 4th line which is what Green has done?

This summers acquisitions won't have any effect on our results and you know it. When you watch the games last season, you honestly thought that if we improved our 4th line than our results would be different? I call BS if you say this was what you saw. So, why fix a papercut when we're hemorrhaging from our scoring deficiencies and awful D? It makes no F'n sense!

Green is similar to AV in that he likes to utilize offensive players in offensive roles and defensive players in defensive roles. The Sedins' offensive zone start % and Sutter's defensive zone start % last season were by far career highs. Let's face it, scoring is a problem but players that Green could trust defensively was a problem as well. Benning going out and getting Roussel, Beagle, and Shaller is an effort to add depth defensively and to help on the PK which was ranked near the bottom.

There are essentially zero options on the UFA market that would help stop the "hemorrhaging" besides Tavares. The market for offensive players (not to mention under 30 offensive players) simply isn't there the past 2 years. Obviously I like Tavares (which Benning speculatively wanted to put together an offer for), but besides him, there really aren't guys I wanted to sign to the contracts that they signed for.

If you have followed the potential UFA signing threads, most of us were looking at Da Haan and Riley Nash types. The main issue people take with the Roussel and Beagle signings were length of contract and to a lesser extent the money.

I would have ended it with a lesson in basic economics, but I need to reference your last paragraph. Again, I don't understand how you can ignore everything that doesn't support your ideology. Motte earned his opportunity no doubt! However, NOBODY had even given the guy a second thought prior to the preseason. Motte advancing was not preordained by anyone who makes decisions on this team. Are you insinuating that he was predestined to advance and that's why Gaunce was never in the canuck's plans...hence the two preseason games he got? Regardless, Motte has nothing to do with Gaunce, he advanced by earning himself the chance. However, there are PLENTY of players on the canucks who DID NOT deserve to be gifted a spot on the team ahead of Gaunce, Archie too. To make this short, what has Schaller accomplished or shown in this preseason to earn a spot over Gaunce or Archie? Other than being a bennbrod acquisition, has he proven himself?

Considering that management essentially traded Vanek for Motte and likely would have given Motte more than 15 games last season if not his waivers situation, I think it's fair to say that management had hopes that Mote would "advance" and make the team.

As for plenty of players on the Canucks who did not deserve to be gifted a spot ahead of Gaunce and Archie, well did Gaunce and Archie earn a spot or deserve to be gifted a spot? Archibald needed to have the type of camp he did last preseason to earn a spot. He didn't. Gaunce was battling for a spot and didn't do much. Does anyone think that Gaunce not making the team is Benning's decision rather than Green's? Perhaps if the decision was Gaunce or Goldobin I can see Benning going with Goldy. Green has basically been Gaunce's main coach in his pro career so far. When Gaunce signed his current contract there were reports that management really liked Gaunce and saw him as a 15+ goal scorer. I think if Green was pushing for Gaunce to be on the team he would be on it.

 

[stampedingviking]

Yes, Granlund has been deployed up and down the lineup, but he hasn't been good! Defensively, Granlund is not equal to Gaunce and on offence, Granlund has been awful when not paired with our top players or on the top PP. Gaunce has never been gifted these opportunities to succeed, so I think it's ignorant to compare the two. Here's what we do know, Granlund has been awful when playing his role and not gifted prime minutes with top players. Gaunce has been effective in his role playing against the toughest matchups with mostly defensive starts.

Versatality playing wing and centre? check for Gaunce. Up and down the lineup...he's only been given the heavy lifting on the 4th. Granlund is nowhere near Gaunce's ability on the 4th and according to 'experts' like you that praise benning...we don't need Gaunce to move up and down the lineup because we're drowning in depth . Didn't you watch the preseason?

bennbrod and green said they want the 3rd & 4th to be a checking line and Gaunce brings that and proven to be much better at it than Granlund. Gaunce could play on any of these two lines if necessary. You tell me one player on the canucks that is playing on the 4th that can move into the top two lines? Is this 'versatality' only defined for Gaunce's role or is it a prerequisite for all 4th liners in the NHL? Or is this just your 'expert' opinion? I don't know many 4th liners in the NHL today that can play in the top two lines...do you? and if so, give me names. Considering we have one of the most expensive 4th lines in the NHL, it might be smart for you to name canuck 4th liners first.

And Archie does deserve to be on this team too...he also brings more than 3 or 4 other players do.

If Granlund played on an American team you think they would have another revolution? What's your point? There are 4 other players on this team that would have as much reaction as a silent fart if they got sent down, and even less so on an American team. Unfortunately, there are more hockey-minds in Canada so you will inevitably have more thinkers. Maybe you should consider cheering for an American team? They voted trump in so you won't have problems finding people with like minds.

Again...what's your argument about an American team have to do with Gaunce? Is this your 'expert' reasoning?...FFS.

I won't delve too much into cap space cause the subject is far too complicated and 'experts' like you think cap space doesn't produce goals, so who cares. However, if you compound (insert 'add' if you're confused) the ridiculous salaries of bennbrod's acquisitions and traded these players or got rid of these players who are underperforming, we would have enough cap space to take on other team's bad contracts and stack our draft picks. Yes, Granlunds contract won't hurt us alone, but you compound these contracts and the sum is an advantage we could be maximizing. It's our opportunity costs that I'm getting at. Keep players who are equally good on the lower contracts, get rid of those acquisitions that are marginally better players or worse players that have high salaries.

Overall, this team would be in the same position at the end of the year, near the bottom because the guys acquired won't win us any games. EXCEPT, our prospects development has been improved with the NHL experience, our young guys will have a stonger bond fighting through the 'tough' years together and we can acquire more draft picks with the cap space saved.

I look forward to reading your trump logic when you realize that this team has not improved this year after acquiring one of the highest paid 4th lines in the NHL, for multiple years to come. Oh...I forgot about trump logic, Gaunce didn't produce, he's to blame for our scoring issues.

Are we really better off sending down our prospects who worked hard over the summer for these older guys who need mentors themselves?

What an absolute load of cobblers! Tou really need to get over your love for Gaunce, he's not even as good as Granlund.

 

[nuck luck]

Some of your observations are just plain weird.......I don't have a clue what you are babbling about...Motte..?..

So who did not deserve to be 'gifted ' a spot on the Canucks ahead of Gaunce?

Yes...I understand that Maximizing cap space eludes you as does the concept of improving our most problematic areas instead of least problematic.

And YOU brought up Motte out of the blue...you are either forgetful or you really do have no clue.

 

[nuck luck]

Given that you posted this after the season opener, no that is not a fair statement.

'Given that you posted this after the season opener..'? Wtf?

Are you implying I watched the game and than posted a statement about the canucks struggling to score? Yeah... I purposely wanted to contradict myself haha

You don't make sense what exactly are you trying to say?


If Granlund is a 3rd line plug, don't you want to move him to the 4th line which is what Green has done?

He was playing on the 3rd line, but I really think he's a 4th line plug or AHL star. And YES! I'm happy to see him moved to the 4th, now he needs to play solid D AND start racking up points.

I guess you agree that his demotion PROVES that Granlund was not a top line player and he was gifted those prime minutes with WD. pom please take note!

You also agree that bennbrod are idiots and don't really know what they're doing. There really was no need to sign the most expensive 4th line in the NHL because we already had equivolent players in the system.

This was the basis of this argument with pom, Granlund was only brought up as a comparison when the discussion moved into 'earning' ice time....I still stand on Granlund being gifted his prime ice time. He never earned it just like Vey didn't.

This is not about which player is better between Gaunce and Granlund, it's about bennbrod's hideous acquisitions and their ignorance of the canucks real problems.


Green is similar to AV in that he likes to utilize offensive players in offensive roles and defensive players in defensive roles. The Sedins' offensive zone start % and Sutter's defensive zone start % last season were by far career highs. Let's face it, scoring is a problem but players that Green could trust defensively was a problem as well. Benning going out and getting Roussel, Beagle, and Shaller is an effort to add depth defensively and to help on the PK which was ranked near the bottom.

Agree with scoring being a huge problem and defensively responsible F, but our entire D, outside of Tanev and possibly Stretch, is a cancer. Gaunce is one of the few players Green could trust to be defensively responsible...so do you see the frustration with 'fixing' the 4th when the bigger problems were the top 3 lines?

The problem with bennbrod is he ignored all the real problems and focused on the 4th line that could have been improved from within. Sure, I can understand bringing in a C...but there's no excuse for giving up high-priced multi-year contracts to replace the entire 4th line.

Just like you said, Granlund is on the 4th now...and where are the other two newly signed vets needed for their defensive acumen and PK abilities? One is injured but not substantially better than players here and the other is just awful...how can you support these moves by bennbrod?

There are essentially zero options on the UFA market that would help stop the "hemorrhaging" besides Tavares. The market for offensive players (not to mention under 30 offensive players) simply isn't there the past 2 years. Obviously I like Tavares (which Benning speculatively wanted to put together an offer for), but besides him, there really aren't guys I wanted to sign to the contracts that they signed for.

The problem is that you think there is only one solution for this and that simply isn't true, this is the problem with bennbrod and his minions.

You claim there are 'zero' options in the UFA market over the past two years (that you personally wanted to sign)? I guess the market is limited if your personal needs are calculated into it, plus having tunnel vision obstructs your options too.

Why are you only looking at elite-level players anyways, we don't need them at this point and there is NO CHANCE they will sign with a bottom feeding team like the canucks or be inclined to work under a mgt that has proven/voted to be one of the worst in the league.

Here's a couple quick options I will list that would have been more beneficial:

1) acquire proven 2nd or 3rd line players with defensive or offensive abilities, or even both combined

2) acquire proven 3rd line players with proven defensive abilities

3) acquire those 30 year old proven players that can fill the top 2 lines you personally don't want. Give them a high salary for 1 year and flip them at the trade deadline for draft picks.

4) upgrade our D and get someone who can actually play D! Yes, they are 'hemorrhaging' goals against us and giving up way too many high-scoring chances.

5) Find better puck moving D! I anxiously wait for you to to mention Karlsson...and NO! at this point we can't afford to pay for elite players and he wouldn't re-sign here anyways. But, I guarantee that it wouldn't take much to improve what bennbrod set up on the back end and it should have been a priority.

6) Trade our vets for younger players in the league (exclude the other team's prospects, especially when they are waiver risks... bennbrod has failed enough times already)

7) Sign only ONE 4th line C who is good on the PK

8A) This ones a doozy! DON'T SIGN ANY RFA AND LEAVE THE 4TH LINE INTACT. I call BS on you if you try and tell me that the 4th line was the biggest issue last year! In fact, the 4th line is usually an issue for contending teams in the SC hunt...not for bottom dwellers like us. This embarrassing bennbrod duo probably think we are Playoff contenders so they focused on upgrading our 4th...

8B) GIVE OUR OWN PLAYERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE AND FURTHER DEVELOP THEIR GAME! At the worst, they improve and get to understand the system and what is expected of them. AND we get higher draft picks so our team is competitive in the near future. Just loading up on highly skilled players will get us nowhere! Our lower line players need their opportunities to improve their games to. This way, they will be ready to do the heavy lifting to help the team be more of a threat when bennbrods gone and our top prospects are ready.

All of the options above are far greater than what bennbrod did. Try to think outside the box and adapt to obstacles in your way instead of relegating yourself to one move, think chess not checkers.

Your comment sounds like the same kind of crap coming from benning when he says draft trades are not available, meanwhile, all the other GMs are picking up draft picks in their trades... no RFA available when there are so many other options out there.

If you have followed the potential UFA signing threads, most of us were looking at Da Haan and Riley Nash types. The main issue people take with the Roussel and Beagle signings were length of contract and to a lesser extent the money.

No! Again, there are more issues than you percieve... OPEN YOUR TRAIN OF THOUGHT!

- length of contract is a problem, YES
- $ amount and cap hit, YES
- was not necessary because our 4th line is not our biggest problem! HELL YES
- stunting our prospects development by taking away valuable ice time. And don't try any BS about prospects not being ready... Archie is and so is Gaunce. And as you pointed out, Granlund played on the 4th opening night.
- These same type players could have been had for pennies on the dollar if bennbrod was patient.
- not being able to maximize having extra cap space! We could and NEED to start acquiring more draft picks because preseason has shown our prospects, especially on D, are not that good

So, your 'simple issues' that people had are wrong and much more complex and profound.


Considering that management essentially traded Vanek for Motte and likely would have given Motte more than 15 games last season if not his waivers situation, I think it's fair to say that management had hopes that Mote would "advance" and make the team.

Are you trying to tell me that Motte was on people's list to make the team? You had him ranked hire than our other prospects? If mgt had any inclination they would have dropped his name in numerous conversations to hype up all their minions. He wasn't really on their radar at the start of preseason. I'm actually really happy for Motte and glad to see him get a chance cause he EARNED it.

It's more believable that they just took whatever they could get or, most likely, whatever another team thought they could get away with in this trade. bennbrod just got lucky and really didn't expect much out of him, whatever they got would have been better than the ridicule of having let ANOTHER player walk with NOTHING in return. AGAIN.

As for plenty of players on the Canucks who did not deserve to be gifted a spot ahead of Gaunce and Archie, well did Gaunce and Archie earn a spot or deserve to be gifted a spot? Archibald needed to have the type of camp he did last preseason to earn a spot. He didn't. Gaunce was battling for a spot and didn't do much. Does anyone think that Gaunce not making the team is Benning's decision rather than Green's? Perhaps if the decision was Gaunce or Goldobin I can see Benning going with Goldy. Green has basically been Gaunce's main coach in his pro career so far. When Gaunce signed his current contract there were reports that management really liked Gaunce and saw him as a 15+ goal scorer. I think if Green was pushing for Gaunce to be on the team he would be on it.

Are you F'N kidding me? You're seriously questioning Archie and Gaunce and claiming others did enough?

More than half of our D didn't show up for preseason and they sure as F didn't deserve ice time for their performance during the preseason or last year for that matter. We could have gone with 1 less Dman and have an extra F... but quickly, tell me what Schaller did to stay on this team? what did Eriksson do? Grandlund? etc...

I think Archie brings more to the table and is more effective when playing tough teams. Goals for and against was embarrassing during preseason, and out of the few games when Gaunce played he had zero goals against. Can we say the same about all the other players that you think 'earned' their way to the canucks?

Archie and Gaunce have been dedicated and loyal with no complaints. They came to this camp in shape and did what mgt asked of them. They were NOT outplayed by others and actually did what was asked of them on the ice, play tough and not get scored on, respectively. Yes, I would reward employees for this and I would most definitely give Archie and Gaunce an opportunity. Give kids hope and watch them soar, take it away and watch them wither.

They ended last year on good terms with Archie outplaying Granlund and Gaunce doing his job preventing goals, so they did prove something last year. Just comparing player for player in the preseason, Archie outplayed Granlund and Gaunce outplayed Schaller.

How many points did the 3 new, highly-paid, long-term, older acquisitions get during preseason? How many goals against? I understand one was out with a concussion, but bennbrod said he got these 'tough' guys cause their game makes them less injury prone and they can put up points! Thus far, one is injured and 0 points.

The difference between the new acquisitions and Gaunce/Archie needs to be substantial to warrant the cap hit and term, plus other issues that arise from signing them this summer.

Bolded due to your multi-quotes

 

[nuck luck]

What an absolute load of cobblers! Tou really need to get over your love for Gaunce, he's not even as good as Granlund.

Cobblers? How dare you sir!

A complete spoonful of kibbles & bits your comment is!

It's not about Granlund vs Gaunce...try reading and understanding a subject before you start throwing your cobblers around in glass houses.