View Single Post
03-19-2013, 05:45 PM
Registered User
mossey3535's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,440
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by deckercky View Post
I don't think any of the individual moves were real issues btw.
-Ballard trade was fine at the time. Raymond had shown more, and I don't think AV would have tried Grabner on the 3rd line regularly. Canucks lacked a top 4 defender and couldn't depend on Hamhuis ignoring other suitors to take less to come here.
-Resigning Bieksa over Edler wasn't an issue. Bieksa's had some bad stretches, but he's a real driver of team success.
-As an avid Ballard defender, keeping Ballard over resigning Ehrhoff was the biggest mistake. Ehrhoff probably could have been kept on a reasonable term (5 or so years) and a reasonable cap hit ($5M or so).
-Hodgson for Kassian was fine too. It was position of strength to fill a position of weakness. Canucks have lacked a top 6 forward with size for some time, and Kassian's skillset will be valuable for quite some time.
-Trading for Booth was a no brainer. Samuelsson had ceased to be the player he was when he scored 35 goals. He was a subpar 2nd liner, and had slid down to the 3rd line already, where he wasn't particularly effective. Booth had the potential to be a great fit. Didn't work out, but it was the right move 100 times out of 100.

So the one bad move was not resigning Ehrhoff. The rest weren't individually bad (most were good moves), but they fundamentally changed the character of the team as a whole.
Great post! I'd just like to say that keeping Ballard versus keeping Edler weren't necessarily linked. We did offer Ehrhoff a contract, and if he had signed we would have had both.

We WOULD probably have had to move Ballard after, but I've never heard it said that we let Ehrhoff go because Ballard was his replacement (although I personally thought that it would work).

mossey3535 is offline   Reply With Quote