Langdon, Baumgartner gone

Castor Troy
10-03-2003, 09:45 AM
TSN is reporting that Montreal picked up Langdon and Pittsburgh picked up Baumgartner in the waiver draft today. TSN Article (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=55966)

NFITO
10-03-2003, 11:56 AM
no big loss...

I'm just glad we didn't lose Bouck on waivers... and now he can move up and down through the season without having to go through waivers again.

the only thing losing Baumer does is give Mojzis, Koltsov, Vydareny and Grenier a chance to work hard to be the first call up this season... a positive IMO.

losing Langdon was a good thing... he wasn't going to play much, and now we have a spot for our younger players to come up.

My guess is that Keane is going to get signed now though?

Hobo
10-03-2003, 12:07 PM
The Canucks will miss Langdon's grit - even though it does open up ice for players like King and Keane. Looks like Martin Grenier should be the happiest guy in Winnipeg today. Brad May needs to stay healthy too.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 12:18 PM
I'm actually glad that the Canucks 'lost' these two players as it opens up a spot for some of the younger guys. Langdon was pretty much replaced by May when Brad was re-signed and Martin Grenier can provide some extra toughness when needed. Langdon's spot can now be filled by Mike Keane, who should be signed now to play as the 13th/14th forward. That leaves an open spot for call-ups from the minors. Baumgartner's spot can be filled by guys like Mojsis, Grenier, Koltsov(if he improves), Jokela etc.

Peter
10-03-2003, 12:20 PM
The Canucks will miss Langdon's grit - even though it does open up ice for players like King and Keane. Looks like Martin Grenier should be the happiest guy in Winnipeg today. Brad May needs to stay healthy too.

No big losses IMO.

Losing Baumgartner simply means Grenier or Mojisz now coming up to play. And losing Langdon means we can now sign Keane and probably keep King up.

I too am very, very glad not to lose Bouck.

All in all a very interesting waiver draft day.

*I am a little disappointed that Burke did not grab Simpson, if he was even still available for Canucks to pick.

MVP
10-03-2003, 12:25 PM
i look at it as that Canucks have close to extra 1 millions dollars to spend now.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 12:29 PM
*I am a little disappointed that Burke did not grab Simpson, if he was even still available for Canucks to pick.

I'm pretty sure that Anaheim picked a couple spots ahead of the Canucks. If he had fallen, I'm sure Burke would've thought about taking him and exposing Slegr, as Slegr likely would've been picked up.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 12:30 PM
i look at it as that Canucks have close to extra 1 millions dollars to spend now.

Not really. They have Langdon's spot to fill(saved $500,000) and most minor league players would make around that much when called from the minors. Baumgartner was also on a two-way deal which would've paid him around $50,000-75,000 when in the minors.

incawg
10-03-2003, 12:33 PM
I would have liked to have kept Bomber as he provided some useful depth even at #8. That being said, it's MUCH better for him to be in pittsburgh. He will be a top 4 defender there. We don't really need him, but you can never have to many NHL-caliber defenders.

I'm actually happy to see Langdon go. I'm certain that this paves the way for Keane to be signed, who will be much more useful come playoff time. Langdon was pretty much a one-dimensional goon, something that is easily replaceable either inside or outside the organization.

maruk14
10-03-2003, 01:10 PM
Good for Baumgartner. Hopefully he will get an opportunity to play an entire season in the NHL.

Agreed about Langdon. Grenier and May more than make up for his loss.

What exactly is this fascination with Bouck? He plays hard, which is admirable, but he has no hands and no finish. I doubt he gets any games this year. King, Reid and Kesler are all well ahead of him on the depth chart. Bouck gets lumped in with the Kavanagh's and Komarniski's as far as a callup is concerned, and choosing between those three is a tossup. They all bring the same thing - intensity, hitting, and no offense. In fact, those 2 both had more goals last year

Komarniski - 15 goals (1st year playing forward as a pro)
Kavanagh - 15 goals (leader in playoff scoring for the Moose, I think)
Bouck - 10 goals

Like I said, if there is a callup it is a tossup between those 3. Neither one stands out above the other but for some reason Bouck gets talked about all the time while those other 2 are ignored. What gives?

colonel_korn
10-03-2003, 01:16 PM
Langdon was pretty much a one-dimensional goon, something that is easily replaceable either inside or outside the organization.

I hope he will be replaced though...even though he didn't play much, it was nice knowing we had someone on our NHL roster who could hang with the real heavyweights in the league. Don't forget that we have Worrell in our division now, as well as Laraque and Johnson. Sorry but May and Allen aren't going to cut it with those guys. I give Allen credit for being willing to go, but let's face it the guy is a punching bag with size and not much else. Heck I think the only guy he beat last year was Clark Wilm. May can throw em pretty good but he's not big enough to take on the heavies out there...see his fight with Reed Low last year :p. Who's going to deal with Johnson next time that punk-ass decides to take a run at Ohlund or Naslund?

I guess within the organisation we have Grenier, but it seems to me that dressing a defenseman who's only out there to throw punches is a bit more costly than doing the same with a forward. Also he'd have to be called up from Manitoba, which is a bit more of a pain then just sticking Langdon into the lineup was.

I guess we'll see how things go at the start of the season...I remember last year we started without an enforcer too, and we had guys running Cloutier left right and centre...seems to me that didn't happen nearly so much when we had Langdon out there... :dunno:

maruk14
10-03-2003, 01:22 PM
May can throw em pretty good but he's not big enough to take on the heavies out there...see his fight with Reed Low last year :p. :

In fairness to May, that fight against Lowe was after he had already taken on Salvador and was at the end of his shift when Lowe came fresh off the bench and challenged him. He was tired, and admitted so after the game, but said he felt obligated to give Lowe a scrap.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 01:25 PM
What exactly is this fascination with Bouck? He plays hard, which is admirable, but he has no hands and no finish. I doubt he gets any games this year. King, Reid and Kesler are all well ahead of him on the depth chart. Bouck gets lumped in with the Kavanagh's and Komarniski's as far as a callup is concerned, and choosing between those three is a tossup. They all bring the same thing - intensity, hitting, and no offense. In fact, those 2 both had more goals last year

Komarniski - 15 goals (1st year playing forward as a pro)
Kavanagh - 15 goals (leader in playoff scoring for the Moose, I think)
Bouck - 10 goals

Like I said, if there is a callup it is a tossup between those 3. Neither one stands out above the other but for some reason Bouck gets talked about all the time while those other 2 are ignored. What gives?


I think a lot of people remember the success Bouck had with the Prince George Cougars and the WJC for Canada. He's not as dominant a player, but he was a workhorse then and still is. It's always nice to have depth as well, and Bouck provides that. Bouck also has the most NHL experience of the three which is always nice to have. I do agree though that all three are similar players and when it comes down to calling one of them up, the guys who is playing the best at the time will likely be the first guy recalled.

incawg
10-03-2003, 01:28 PM
I guess we'll see how things go at the start of the season...I remember last year we started without an enforcer too, and we had guys running Cloutier left right and centre...seems to me that didn't happen nearly so much when we had Langdon out there... :dunno:

Although I didn't notice it, if it did happen it was more correlation that causation. Langdon may have won some fights, but he's hardly an "intimidating" presence out there. Guys that can knock your lights out or nail you with a huge hit are going to stop you from running players. Those are two qualities that Langdon failed to bring.

MVP
10-03-2003, 01:29 PM
I think a lot of people remember the success Bouck had with the Prince George Cougars and the WJC for Canada. He's not as dominant a player, but he was a workhorse then and still is. It's always nice to have depth as well, and Bouck provides that. Bouck also has the most NHL experience of the three which is always nice to have. I do agree though that all three are similar players and when it comes down to calling one of them up, the guys who is playing the best at the time will likely be the first guy recalled.


I am sure Kavanagh has couple regular NHL games of experience and one playoff game experience too. i don't see that as too much different between Bouch and Kavanagh if you are talking about experience alone.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 01:29 PM
I hope he will be replaced though...even though he didn't play much, it was nice knowing we had someone on our NHL roster who could hang with the real heavyweights in the league. Don't forget that we have Worrell in our division now, as well as Laraque and Johnson. Sorry but May and Allen aren't going to cut it with those guys. I give Allen credit for being willing to go, but let's face it the guy is a punching bag with size and not much else. Heck I think the only guy he beat last year was Clark Wilm. May can throw em pretty good but he's not big enough to take on the heavies out there...see his fight with Reed Low last year :p. Who's going to deal with Johnson next time that punk-ass decides to take a run at Ohlund or Naslund?

I guess within the organisation we have Grenier, but it seems to me that dressing a defenseman who's only out there to throw punches is a bit more costly than doing the same with a forward. Also he'd have to be called up from Manitoba, which is a bit more of a pain then just sticking Langdon into the lineup was.

I guess we'll see how things go at the start of the season...I remember last year we started without an enforcer too, and we had guys running Cloutier left right and centre...seems to me that didn't happen nearly so much when we had Langdon out there... :dunno:

If the Canucks need a no talent goon, they can pick one up anytime during the season for nothing. They'll stick with "team toughness" for the first part of the season, and if that doesn't work, someone may be brought in. Langdon was a solid fighter, but he was a waste of a roster spot IMO. If the Canucks could get another guy like Brashear(top fighter and can play a regular shift) without the drama, I'd be happy, but that is unlikely to occur.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 01:31 PM
I am sure Kavanagh has couple regular NHL games of experience and one playoff game experience too. i don't see that as too much different between Bouch and Kavanagh if you are talking about experience alone.

Bouck played close to 50 games a couple years ago with Dallas. Kavanagh has 6 NHL games total. Bouck was able to stick on with a top team, Kavanagh hasn't, albeit he hasn't been given much of a chance.

maruk14
10-03-2003, 01:32 PM
Langer is gone, but if the Canucks need an enforcer and they don't feel a May/Grenier combo will work there are still some UFA's available that can scrap.

Jim McKenzie
Jeff Odgers
Rob Ray
Cliff Ronning ..... just kidding ;)

This came off TSN so if these guys have already signed on somewhere I missed it. Point being Langdon is easily replaced.

MVP
10-03-2003, 01:33 PM
Not really. They have Langdon's spot to fill(saved $500,000) and most minor league players would make around that much when called from the minors. Baumgartner was also on a two-way deal which would've paid him around $50,000-75,000 when in the minors.


I don't know, as of right now the money is available. When Burke actually use the money on Keane than it is another story. Even assume the money save up is 575000$, there might be enough to acquire a guy likes Adam Graves.

Not saying Burke is going to do that, but the free up salary do create more option for him.

orcatown
10-03-2003, 01:34 PM
Agree Hobo - either we pick up a heavy weight like Roy, through free agency or trade, or we bring up Grenier and play him as 7th Defenseman when needed.

To - Bouck is below Ready on the depth chart. Ready is a better player as he demonstrated in Manitoba last year. Better scorer, tougher and better leadership. The Canucks will not be making any undue effort to adjust the roster so Bouck can be brought up and down.

Overall a bad day for the team. Lost depth on defense. Lost our only true enforcer and saw potential rival Anahiem beef up their defense by acquiring Simpson. None of which could have been avoided.

Peter G. This does not open up roster spots. If the players where better than those lost they would already be here. Maybe its no great disaster losing Langdon and Baumgartner but it certainly is never a good thing to lose organizational depth. Why try unnecesssarily to find the silver lining. It was a loss poor and simple.

This thing is a little out of order because I tried to poat but the board is so gummed up that it wouldn't post.

maruk14
10-03-2003, 01:34 PM
I think a lot of people remember the success Bouck had with the Prince George Cougars and the WJC for Canada. He's not as dominant a player, but he was a workhorse then and still is. It's always nice to have depth as well, and Bouck provides that. Bouck also has the most NHL experience of the three which is always nice to have. I do agree though that all three are similar players and when it comes down to calling one of them up, the guys who is playing the best at the time will likely be the first guy recalled.

True, but that group will be behind the Reid, King, Kesler group so a callup is a possibility, but not a great one. I just see him over-hyped, IMO, on this board and was wondering aloud what the big deal was.

He didn't even have a very good camp and was sent down pretty early, but he is being mentioned as thankfully not being taken in the waiver draft.

Mr. Canucklehead
10-03-2003, 01:35 PM
Langer and Baumer gave us depth, but losing them is no big, really. I was never a big fan of Baumgartner myself--one good game and everyone loved him. :dunno: But Langdon was great for his tenure with the team--good team guy, always willing to scrap. But it looks as if the "team toughness" is back...we'll see how long that lasts before Burke addresses it again. Of course we can always call up Martin Grenier. :p

I'm glad to see Baumer go, little sad about Langdon, but he'll have fun in Montreal.

~Canucklehead~

MVP
10-03-2003, 01:39 PM
Bouck played close to 50 games a couple years ago with Dallas. Kavanagh has 6 NHL games total. Bouck was able to stick on with a top team, Kavanagh hasn't, albeit he hasn't been given much of a chance.


The thing that is disappointing about Bouck is that he had very good opportunity to make the Coyo team couple seasons ago, but he failed the test, but sometime grit player likes that take awhile to develop. i still think that Burke might bring in someone from the outside if King or Keane cannot do the job.


i mean Steve Thomas, Adam Oates, Adam Graves plus other are still available for probably a very cheap price.

Or maybe to acquire an enforcer altogether.

There are a lot of possibility at this stage, but if Canucks just need a player for couple games due to injury emegerence, i prefer to call up Kesler and give him couple games of experience.

MVP
10-03-2003, 01:40 PM
He didn't even have a very good camp and was sent down pretty early, but he is being mentioned as thankfully not being taken in the waiver draft.



Agreed

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 01:45 PM
Peter G. This does not open up roster spots. If the players where better than those lost they would already be here. Maybe its no great disaster losing Langdon and Baumgartner but it certainly is never a good thing to lose organizational depth. Why try unnecesssarily to find the silver lining. It was a loss poor and simple.

This definitely opens up at least one NHL roster spot IMO. With May re-signed and playing a regular shift and Burke stating that Grenier was going to see a handful of NHL action this year, Langdon was going to find it hard to see NHL action, quite possible only 10 games or so. At $500,000 and on a one-way contract he was wasting a roster spot that could've been better used as a call-up spot for players from the farm. Baumgartner's spot always the Canucks to use some of their younger players and give them a chance to play. I'm less pleased about losing Baumgartner as he was an ideal 8th d-man IMO(knew his role and accepted it. I'm glad he'll get a chance at regular NHL action with the Pens now!), but how can you argue that this doesn't open up a spot, as it cleary does! I see the loss in losing Baumgartner, that happens with teams with as much depth as the Canucks. But I really don't see the loss by losing Langdon. IMO, he wasn't going to see much NHL action anyway, why not use his spot to give some of the young guys NHL time?

KOMO_ROCKS
10-03-2003, 02:20 PM
Look forward to seeing Langdon playing in Montreal....from what I have heard here he is a solid tough guy who brings size, character and grit.

MVP
10-03-2003, 02:26 PM
Look forward to seeing Langdon playing in Montreal....from what I have heard here he is a solid tough guy who brings size, character and grit.


He is basically Dwyer with more experience and fighting skill. His salary is cheap so it is a good pick up for Montreal.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-03-2003, 02:31 PM
He is basically Dwyer with more experience and fighting skill. His salary is cheap so it is a good pick up for Montreal.

He is also a good character player, which always helps as far as the dressing room is concerned.....he is a good team player from what I have heard from some Canuck fans

MVP
10-03-2003, 02:35 PM
He is also a good character player, which always helps as far as the dressing room is concerned.....he is a good team player from what I have heard from some Canuck fans



Of course he has good charater, that is single biggest asset that maintain his employment in the NHL. He is one of the best cheerleaders around.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 02:37 PM
True, but that group will be behind the Reid, King, Kesler group so a callup is a possibility, but not a great one. I just see him over-hyped, IMO, on this board and was wondering aloud what the big deal was.

With Langdon gone, I think King starts the season with the Canucks, even if Keane is signed. I do agree that the Kesler's and Reid's are likely to be called up first.

KOMO_ROCKS
10-03-2003, 02:39 PM
Of course he has good charater, that is single biggest asset that maintain his employment in the NHL. He is one of the best cheerleaders around.

No need to diss the guy just because he is no longer on the canucks :rolleyes:

maruk14
10-03-2003, 02:46 PM
With Langdon gone, I think King starts the season with the Canucks, even if Keane is signed. I do agree that the Kesler's and Reid's are likely to be called up first.

Agreed. The point was he is another prospect that will get NHL games before Bouck.

My post wasn't necessarily directed at your response even though I quoted you. Just looking for why people are so relieved he didn't get taken in the waiver draft, and why he is so highly touted on this board?

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 02:47 PM
No need to diss the guy just because he is no longer on the canucks :rolleyes:

That and his fighting. That is really all that has kept him in the NHL. Besides, how is saying that Langdon is a great guy/team player a diss?

MVP
10-03-2003, 02:48 PM
No need to diss the guy just because he is no longer on the canucks :rolleyes:



Well... those are his major assets, good team player who will cheer the other players on and create a positive atmosphere in the locker room. And his on ice ability is his fighting skill. i mean what you expect, a sniper who scores 20 goals?

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 02:49 PM
My post wasn't necessarily directed at your response even though I quoted you. Just looking for why people are so relieved he didn't get taken in the waiver draft, and why he is so highly touted on this board?


The only explanation I can give you is that he was a highly regarded WHL player(played for Prince George) and was a key member of Team Canada at the WJC's a few years back(I think he was the captain, possibly two years in a row). Bouck has a lot of history in BC and was a solid WHL player, perhaps people still hold out hope that he can become a decent NHL'er, which he still could become, just not likely with Vancouver.

maruk14
10-03-2003, 02:52 PM
The only explanation I can give you is that he was a highly regarded WHL player(played for Prince George) and was a key member of Team Canada at the WJC's a few years back(I think he was the captain, possibly two years in a row). Bouck has a lot of history in BC and was a solid WHL player, perhaps people still hold out hope that he can become a decent NHL'er, which he still could become, just not likely with Vancouver.

Yeah, I read your post earlier. Makes sense. I need to quit quoting you and then asking a general question ;)

I would be interested in hearing some other fans opinions on this too.

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 02:59 PM
Yeah, I read your post earlier. Makes sense. I need to quit quoting you and then asking a general question ;)

I would be interested in hearing some other fans opinions on this too.

The only explanation I can give you is...



I'll just shut-up now... :D

cyrisweb
10-03-2003, 03:35 PM
All in all not bad..

Loosing Baumgartner kind of sucks as he was a capable depth dman. It will hurt the Moose more than the Canucks.

Loosing Langdon was not unexpected. He is a great team guy who can match up against just about anybody out there. I didn't feel we really needed him anymore though. Loosing him just allows the Canucks too sign Keane AND keep Ready, King, Kesler, or another dman around. Which is great.

SO basically we lost a lil depth but other than that no big deal.

Mr. Canucklehead
10-03-2003, 04:01 PM
I think Langdon did a good job while he was here, but he wouldn't have received much ice time this season. Lots of factors would have contributed to that--May being a capable player while being a decent fighter, Ruutu's emergence, kids getting callups, the possibility of signing Keane--Langdon was expendable. He was a great team guy and a wonderful character, and I wish him the best of look in Habtown.

Baumgartner...good riddance, I didn't like him. But Langdon can be replaced. Rob Ray is still floating around out there... :yo:

~Canucklehead~

Peter Griffin
10-03-2003, 04:06 PM
Its not all about stats.


It's not, but the Canucks can't afford to be keeping players on the team that can only fight. Langdon seems like a really nice guy and a great team player, but unless you can play a regular NHL shift, you aren't going to get much time with the Canucks. The Red Wings have done well for years without a trur heavyweight electing to go with team toughness led by Darren McCarty. I think the Canucks as a whole are a tougher team than the wings and Brad May is just as good of a fighter as McCarty IMO. The Canucks will miss Langdon's personality, but won't really miss what he brings IMO.

LaVal
10-03-2003, 04:06 PM
i'm glad Baumgartner was taken because in Pittsburgh he'll have more of a chance to play. he is capable of being a #6 dman on many teams.

but i'm very dissapointed Langdon was taken. we no longer have a top-10 enforcer out there to stir things up against people like Laraque, Worrell, and Shelly when our team needs a spark or have liberties taken against them. i was looking forward to more Langdon - Worrell matchups.

Langdon also kept the team loose and was a great lockerroom guy. i hope Keane can provide the Canucks with some of that.

SedinFan*
10-03-2003, 04:07 PM
I think Langdon did a good job while he was here, but he wouldn't have received much ice time this season. Lots of factors would have contributed to that--May being a capable player while being a decent fighter, Ruutu's emergence, kids getting callups, the possibility of signing Keane--Langdon was expendable. He was a great team guy and a wonderful character, and I wish him the best of look in Habtown.

Baumgartner...good riddance, I didn't like him. But Langdon can be replaced. Rob Ray is still floating around out there... :yo:

~Canucklehead~

Rob Ray rules

Eric
10-03-2003, 04:16 PM
We can live without Baumgartner, but it sucks to lose Langdon. He came to camp in such good shape and even scored a few goals in the exhibition games. I was looking forward to see if he can do the same in the regular season.

Baumer is an excellent defenseman, but will never get a regular spot on the Canucks roster. He's better off somewhere else and Pittsburgh is a great place for him. With so much depth on the blueline, someone like Jokela or Eakins can easily step up and take his spot.

PhillyNucksFan
10-03-2003, 04:36 PM
actually, i wasnt surprised that Boughmer and langdon got picked up.. as both are quality NHL players that many other teams might be lacking in this diluted NHL pool.

Like many have said, Langdon, after watching him last year, and some interviews he had and etc, I really liked him and the way he plays and handles the situation.. he can play 2 games in a row and then site 30 games and then come back and give it all again WITHOUT complaining at ALL!!.. great locker room guy.. we will miss him as a player/person, but not his skill.. But, I'd say he is one of the better gifted goon/personality NHL caliber player out there.

Boumer, well, nothing much to be said here.. He could be a top 4 D man in Pittsburgh given the opportunity.. I think he is quite happy now finally he can play regularly in the NHL, and develop/increase his stock value.. He wont have a chance in Vancouver.. not when we have first round darft pick 1 foot inside the door in Allen, Jokela/Mojzis/Koltsov

nuksforlife
10-03-2003, 05:31 PM
Some of you will not like what I am about to say but I will say it anyway. IMO Langdon is a waste of space on our lineup. We do not need him, we have May that can play and fight. This will free up some room for the young guys to come in and provide a bit more of a chance for some goals on the 4th line then Langdon. I think Langdons loss will do better then worse for the Nuks.

Hobo
10-03-2003, 06:10 PM
Also look at it from the players' point of view. Waiver draft is a chance for guys who are getting older to get to play elsewhere, and younger exempt guys more chance to show what they can do. Baumgartner has paid his dues and now has a chance to move his career forward without Jiri Slegr in his way. Allen, Koltsov etc.,. have more ice to share around, and it is easier to find space for Keane when his experience might help.

SopelFan*
10-03-2003, 08:53 PM
Also look at it from the players' point of view. Waiver draft is a chance for guys who are getting older to get to play elsewhere, and younger exempt guys more chance to show what they can do. Baumgartner has paid his dues and now has a chance to move his career forward without Jiri Slegr in his way. Allen, Koltsov etc.,. have more ice to share around, and it is easier to find space for Keane when his experience might help.
Good post. I think although Langer was great... he really kinda took up a spot that 2 guys were pushing for.

PhillyNucksFan
10-03-2003, 09:23 PM
Also look at it from the players' point of view. Waiver draft is a chance for guys who are getting older to get to play elsewhere, and younger exempt guys more chance to show what they can do. Baumgartner has paid his dues and now has a chance to move his career forward without Jiri Slegr in his way. Allen, Koltsov etc.,. have more ice to share around, and it is easier to find space for Keane when his experience might help.


yes, good thought!

Baumgertner certainly paid his dues, and I really liked him when he scored the goal vs STL last year, and he deserves his chance and I believe he will do very well elsewhere.. its just not a good time for him to be in Canucks right now as we aim for the ultimate prize.

Proby24
10-04-2003, 01:23 AM
Wasn't it the failure of 'team toughness' that forced Burke to deal for Langdon last year. He will be missed by the Canucks and I wish him the best in Montreal. Burke will be dealing away a 4th round pick come January to pick up a legitimate enforcer for protection.

Arguing about fourth line roster space is all well and good but its irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things. The Canucks will win nothing with Cloutier between the pipes. NOTHING.

Peter Griffin
10-04-2003, 05:31 AM
Remember, do not feed the "you know what"...


;)

Bobby Lou
10-04-2003, 06:33 AM
Wasn't it the failure of 'team toughness' that forced Burke to deal for Langdon last year. He will be missed by the Canucks and I wish him the best in Montreal. Burke will be dealing away a 4th round pick come January to pick up a legitimate enforcer for protection.

Arguing about fourth line roster space is all well and good but its irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things. The Canucks will win nothing with Cloutier between the pipes. NOTHING.

There are still a number of enforcers who are free agents I believe. So if we act fast enough it isn't an issue.

Personally though, I'm not too worried...this team has loads of sandpaper and grit in May, Allen, Slegr, Ruutu, Cooke and Grenier (dwelling in the minors).

LaVal
10-04-2003, 07:06 AM
Wasn't it the failure of 'team toughness' that forced Burke to deal for Langdon last year.

no. it was the failure of team defense that forced Burke to deal for Malik. the Salo with Jovanovski experiment failed (although Salo is good for us now) at the time and Hlavac and Druken were underperforming here and weren't fitting in with the team anymore. Druken and Langdon were more likely throw-ins to even out the deal.

but yes, i feel Langdon will be missed.

kmad
10-04-2003, 01:58 PM
i look at it as that Canucks have close to extra 1 millions dollars to spend now.

$975,000 to be exact

KOMO_ROCKS
10-04-2003, 03:48 PM
Well... those are his major assets, good team player who will cheer the other players on and create a positive atmosphere in the locker room. And his on ice ability is his fighting skill. i mean what you expect, a sniper who scores 20 goals?

I think Langdon is a very useful player for the fourth line of the habs..need some size and toughness and character

Peter Griffin
10-04-2003, 05:10 PM
$975,000 to be exact

It's actually closer to $575,000 as Baumgartner was on a two-way contract and likely would've spent a lot of time with the Moose. Hopefully this extra money goes to signing Keane to become the 13th forward. At least that's what I'd like to see happen.

Peter Griffin
10-04-2003, 05:34 PM
I think Langdon is a very useful player for the fourth line of the habs..need some size and toughness and character

Langdon will serve a good role for the Habs and should be a great fit there. But Vancouver can't afford to have a player like Langdon taking a roster spot when he can't really be counted on to play a regular NHL shift.

As for team toughness, a lot of people say it won't work, but the Red Wings have been using this philosphy for years electing only dress one "fighter" in McCarty, who I think is qutie comparable to May in the fighting/toughness department and they haven't had any problems. If they do run into toughness problems, then an enforcer of Langdon's ilk can be acquired quite cheaply.