HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Pettinger to Tampa, claimed on Waivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-21-2008, 12:23 PM
  #51
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
But then why take on Ouellet and pay him even more to play in the AHL?
yeah, if they were looking to dump AHL salary, he should be on waivers as well.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:24 PM
  #52
Vote Quimby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Langley BC
Country: Portugal
Posts: 180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ditch View Post
Two doesn't make any sense because he would have to wait for injuries to call him up. What if the team had stayed healthy for the first half of the year or more?
Tell me any team in sports history that can go half a season without injuries? If by some miraculous way that did happen, guys get sick and maladies are made up to allow transactions to occur if necessary.

Vote Quimby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:26 PM
  #53
Rover*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
But then why take on Ouellet and pay him even more to play in the AHL?
Ouellet had negative value and we were forced to take him to get o'brien. Canucks didn't want ouellet, cause he sucks.

Rover* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:27 PM
  #54
The Ditch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 98
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vote Quimby View Post
Tell me any team in sports history that can go half a season without injuries? If by some miraculous way that did happen, guys get sick and maladies are made up to allow transactions to occur if necessary.

Look at my post on the other page, also you would have to wait for an injury to your forwards, and depending on which forward was injured you wouldn't have brought up Pettinger anyways.

The Ditch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:29 PM
  #55
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rover View Post
Ouellet had negative value and we were forced to take him to get o'brien. Canucks didn't want ouellet, cause he sucks.
But that's what I mean. If they wanted to save money on AHL salaries, they would have recalled Ouellet too (or not involved him in the trade in the first place). Or why not recall Jeff Cowan? He's more useless and not even helping the Moose but there's a good chance he gets claimed for half his salary by some team close to the cap in need of depth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ditch View Post
Look at my post on the other page, also you would have to wait for an injury to your forwards, and depending on which forward was injured you wouldn't have brought up Pettinger anyways.
Not necessarily. If they were bringing him up just to get claimed by another team, it wouldn't really matter where on the depth chart the injury happened as you could find a way to fit him into the lineup.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:30 PM
  #56
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ditch View Post
Look at my post on the other page, also you would have to wait for an injury to your forwards, and depending on which forward was injured you wouldn't have brought up Pettinger anyways.
If the goal is just to put Pettinger on re-entry waivers, it doesn't matter who is injured. There are no rules that you have to replace a forward with a forward on the roster.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:30 PM
  #57
Meganuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,036
vCash: 500
Talking about Knee Jerk reactions, alot of people on this thread are over-reacting.

All of a sudden Pettinger turned into this Allstar who was such a valuable ASSET to this team.

Before the start of the season most people were already writing him off. Good Riddance.

The guy had speed but so does Rypien and Brown.

Tampa is probably the worst managed team in the league.

Meganuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:31 PM
  #58
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
But that's what I mean. If they wanted to save money on AHL salaries, they would have recalled Ouellet too (or not involved him in the trade in the first place). Or why not recall Jeff Cowan? He's more useless and not even helping the Moose but there's a good chance he gets claimed for half his salary by some team close to the cap in need of depth.



Not necessarily. If they were bringing him up just to get claimed by another team, it wouldn't really matter where on the depth chart the injury happened as you could find a way to fit him into the lineup.
Good thing for Vancouver is all the cap space

soo Pettinger eats up 500,000...........Wellwood gets through

If they need forwards so bad then yea try Cowan now or even gamble on Oulette

OR what I think they will do is take Ward or Rissmiller off waivers , they were just placed on it

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:33 PM
  #59
The Ditch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 98
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
If the goal is just to put Pettinger on re-entry waivers, it doesn't matter who is injured. There are no rules that you have to replace a forward with a forward on the roster.
I was saying that because you can only have a certain number of players on your roster, so for a single injury you couldn't call up two players knowing that the one would get taken, if I am wrong please correct me.

The Ditch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:35 PM
  #60
PuckMunchkin
Registered User
 
PuckMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lapland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rover View Post
Ouellet had negative value and we were forced to take him to get o'brien. Canucks didn't want ouellet, cause he sucks.
Why did we exactly want O'Brien?
He has looked nothing but shaky so far.

PuckMunchkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:39 PM
  #61
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,347
vCash: 500
the greatest thing the team needs right now is penalty killers, far more than they even need scorers, so it wouldn't be surprising to see the team pick up something on waivers. The PK has let in two goals per game for 4 games straight. It's not a coincidence that they're 1-3 during that stretch.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 12:41 PM
  #62
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ditch View Post
I was saying that because you can only have a certain number of players on your roster, so for a single injury you couldn't call up two players knowing that the one would get taken, if I am wrong please correct me.
the team doesn't need to carry a 23 man roster. They can just call up one player, lose him on waivers, and then call up another if they want.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:10 PM
  #63
Balls Mahoney
SAVE US SVEN
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +44 1252 230 607
Country: United States
Posts: 13,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuckMunchkin View Post
Why did we exactly want O'Brien?
He has looked nothing but shaky so far.
Before or after his fists have been knocking pests around and keeping the other team respectful?

Balls Mahoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:16 PM
  #64
Hoss
Registered User
 
Hoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,033
vCash: 91
The Canucks dealt Cooke because he wanted the trade and they didn't want to renegotiate with the fan favorite. They took a chance on Petti because he was signed through this season, unfortunately for Petti he wasn't good enough to be a regular starter.
Losing him on waivers is unfortunate but at least they arent paying him $1million+ to play for the Moose.

Hoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:17 PM
  #65
Danrik
It is what it is.
 
Danrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Super Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,913
vCash: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by snepsts27 View Post
That's Aquilinis problem, it's not like we're up against the cap. And he was being paid 1.1 mil to play in Manitoba.

Exactly. Acquilini actually saves money with this move. With all our cap space I don't really see $500K as an issue this year for us.

And who gives a flying **** about the fact we traded Cooke for him (Nonis move, not Gillis). Cooke was not coming back to play for Vignault. He'd have been gone for nothing anyways.

Danrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:18 PM
  #66
watchman
Registered User
 
watchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 67
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
the greatest thing the team needs right now is penalty killers, far more than they even need scorers, so it wouldn't be surprising to see the team pick up something on waivers. The PK has let in two goals per game for 4 games straight. It's not a coincidence that they're 1-3 during that stretch.
PK was fine coming out of training camp and the first two games vs Calgary.

Road trips historically do not allow time to work on special teams.

Once they are home and have a few practices, this function should be better.

watchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:24 PM
  #67
Rotang
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
the greatest thing the team needs right now is penalty killers, far more than they even need scorers, so it wouldn't be surprising to see the team pick up something on waivers. The PK has let in two goals per game for 4 games straight. It's not a coincidence that they're 1-3 during that stretch.
The problem with the PK isn't the forwards. Our defensemen forgot how to clear rebounds and Luongo has been less than stellar.

The Canucks also rank 3rd in the league in minor penalties with 39 and have played some of the most potent PP's in the league. That won't end tonight either as the CBJ's are currently top 10.

If there's one thing this team has me confident in, it's the fact that they will right their PK.

Rotang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:36 PM
  #68
Spazmatic Dan
Kane for GM
 
Spazmatic Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chatham, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meganuck View Post
Talking about Knee Jerk reactions, alot of people on this thread are over-reacting.

All of a sudden Pettinger turned into this Allstar who was such a valuable ASSET to this team.

Before the start of the season most people were already writing him off. Good Riddance.

The guy had speed but so does Rypien and Brown.

Tampa is probably the worst managed team in the league.
Darnit all, us Leafs can win ANYTHING! I honestly thought we had a chance to win the worst management title last year.

Spazmatic Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:50 PM
  #69
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 21,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spasmic Dan View Post
Darnit all, us Leafs can win ANYTHING! I honestly thought we had a chance to win the worst management title last year.
Don't worry. Tough to beat both our team's (Leafs/Canucks) "management skills" the past roughly 40 years. Not sure whether to laugh or cry.

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:53 PM
  #70
PuckMunchkin
Registered User
 
PuckMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lapland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneDayAsALion View Post
Before or after his fists have been knocking pests around and keeping the other team respectful?
Before AND after.

Being respectful is easy when you are leading by 3 or more goals in the 3rd period.

PuckMunchkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:53 PM
  #71
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,055
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
So when all is said and done we got absolutely nothing in return for Matt Cooke. Fantastic asset management.
And if we let him walk as a UFA (which would have happened)???

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:54 PM
  #72
PuckMunchkin
Registered User
 
PuckMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lapland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Pauser View Post
And if we let him walk as a UFA (which would have happened)???
I don't think the trade part is what he has a problem with,
its more about Gillis loosing the payment we got for Cooke.

PuckMunchkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:58 PM
  #73
JonnyCash
Registered User
 
JonnyCash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuckMunchkin View Post
I don't think the trade part is what he has a problem with,
its more about Gillis loosing the payment we got for Cooke.
It was either that or let him sit in the AHL all year... it's not like he wanted tbay to claim him.

JonnyCash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 01:59 PM
  #74
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuckMunchkin View Post
I don't think the trade part is what he has a problem with,
its more about Gillis loosing the payment we got for Cooke.
I don't mind the fact that they lost him for nothing now considering it was obvious he had no value around the league at his salary.

That said, it was still a stupid decision (IMO) to send him down in the first place over Brown. But now that it's done, losing him doesn't really make a difference for all intents and purposes.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2008, 02:03 PM
  #75
Win One Before I Die
Former Booth Fan
 
Win One Before I Die's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,282
vCash: 500
Our value returned for trading cooke and not letting him walk: a cap hit of 500k.

Shoulda let him walk.

Win One Before I Die is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:14 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.