If people can recall the 94 team, Davison plays a very similar style to one Gerald Diduck.
Excellent comparison, Beeker.
Big guy, fairly tough, ok mobility in straight lines, weak lateral movement, lousy at turning quickly, ok positioning, clears front of net well, nominal offensive ability but decent first pass out of the zone.
If people can recall the 94 team, Davison plays a very similar style to one Gerald Diduck.
Diduck was a legitimate top-4 defender who would be more comparable to a Scott Hannan or Willie Mitchell only with more of a mean streak. He was a really good player who played ~1000 NHL games, and Davison is nowhere near being at that level.
If we're talking early 1990s Canucks, Davison is closer to Robert Dirk. Big, tough #6 defender with no skill to speak of but pretty reliable in his own zone.
Baumer stays where he should, as a veteran captain for the Moose who will provide leadership and stability for the young guys. More depth on D is always a good thing. We now have two capable #7s.
Baumer stays where he should, as a veteran captain for the Moose who will provide leadership and stability for the young guys. More depth on D is always a good thing. We now have two capable #7s.
I like how Gillis signs two completely different guys. Gives the Coach lots of options.
I like how Gillis signs two completely different guys. Gives the Coach lots of options.
Yep. Agreed. If Salo goes down we call Baumer up who is capable of playing on the PP as we've seen.
(I am assuming he still can do that at the NHL level..)
And if we loose Mitchell we bring up Davison so we balance out the pairings.
these are just two examples how I'd imagine it'll go.
I appreciate that Gillis is bringing some much needed grit and toughness onto the team. First Hordichuk, now Davison. I also agree with the mentality of signing two very different depth defenders in Baumgartner(who can be a PP specialist) and Davison, who provides the toughness and character. Good signing.
Clearly a money puck pick up. One of the best long distance scorers in the league, second only to the great Nik Lidstrom. Gillis saw an often overlooked skill on a affordable player and picked up a great asset.
I dont understand this move at all, didnt we have enough defenseman already? Even without Bourdon, this team still has one of the best depth in the entire nhl.
I dont understand this move at all, didnt we have enough defenseman already? Even without Bourdon, this team still has one of the best depth in the entire nhl.
Seriously?
The Canucks lost their 7th, 8th, and 9th defensemen after a season in which they used something like 11 different defensemen. Last season's Miller, Weaver, and Bourdon were looking to be Baumgartner, McIver, and Fitzgerald. That's not so great.
The Canucks lost their 7th, 8th, and 9th defensemen after a season in which they used something like 11 different defensemen. Last season's Miller, Weaver, and Bourdon were looking to be Baumgartner, McIver, and Fitzgerald. That's not so great.
Also.. this probably makes departing with one of our NTC:less D-man sting a little less.
Depart with one of them for offensive help that is.
I thought Baumgartner did a pretty good job last time he was a canuck. And i think at this point McIver is mature enough to take more games in case of injuries, he would be a number 6 defenseman already on a bad team.
I thought Baumgartner did a pretty good job last time he was a canuck. And i think at this point McIver is mature enough to take more games in case of injuries, he would be a number 6 defenseman already on a bad team.
If you had said number 7 about McIver, I'd agree. I don't think any team would be pencilling him into a full-time roster spot just yet.
