The Grabner+ for Ballard trade 1 year later...
View Single Post
09-20-2011, 04:25 AM
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted by
I don't think Gillis would have waived Grabner. He's not an idiot, and the Canucks were aware of Grabner's history of ****** training camps. With that said, he would have struggled on the 4th line and being scratched as the 13th forward, as the Canucks wouldn't have been able to be as patient with him as the Islanders were. In all likelihood he would've been moved during the year anyway, but in a much lesser deal.
This is absolutely true.
I doubt we would have waived him, but if he'd been kept he probably would have been given Tambellini's icetime and it's highly unlikely he would have broken out with that opportunity.
Originally Posted by
The fact that any "30 goal scorer" gets demoted to the third and fourth line should speak volumes.
Wanna know why he didn't stay on the third and fourth lines? Because he is absolutely garbage defensively. Our third line was generally a shut down line. Used against other teams tops lines when we could to free up the Sedins to play against the other teams third line. They had one primary objective. Shut down whatever line you play against. Samuelsson is so horribly bad at defensive hockey, that he made the third line worse relative their primary objective. To play shut down hockey first, and chip in offensively when you can second.
So AV stuck him on the fourth line for a while. Didn't work out there either. Fourth line, at least ours, is an energy line. Go out for a 45 second shift, try not to get hemmed into your own zone, throw some hits, and play with serious intensity. Well, Samuelsson and intensity go together about as well as Sarah Palin and a book on astro physics, so naturally that didn't work either.
So whats left to do? He stinks up the third and fourth lines, which he was demoted to because he was stinking up the second line. Alain Vigneault being the defense first coach that he is, had no choice. If he is being a defensive liability on our defensive third line and energy fourth line, best to just stick him on the second line and hope Kesler can carry him. Hope that he doesn't screw up as much as he inevitably did.
Fact is, there is no place on this team for him. I will be SO very happy when he is gone next year. Say what you want, 1 year removed from a 30 goal campaign and a top coach in the Nhl puts you on the fourth line. That says something. He sucks, and Im happy we only have to see his crappy play for one more year.
Samuelsson is either great or terrible.
He's one of those guys where if he's healthy and confident (as he was for most of 2009-10) he's a terrific asset and excellent 2nd line winger.
If he's carrying a knock, his play falls apart. He was playing with an abdominal injury for much of the 2nd half and absolutely - agree completely - he was terrible.
As for the trade, it's still a logical deal that made perfect sense at the time. It just hasn't worked out.
There was just no way to predict that Ballard's play would fall off so badly at such a young age.
Stuff happens that you can't predict - if we traded Mason Raymond for Alex Ovechkin tomorrow and Ovechkin proceeded to suffer a career-ending injury in his first preseason game, that would be a 'bad trade' in terms of results but obviously doesn't mean you wouldn't do it in hindsight.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MS