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

Canucks sign UFA D Cam Barker to 1-Year, $700K Deal

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-13-2013, 01:09 PM
  #101
ahmon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,224
vCash: 500
wouldn't it make sense to see how he performs in the training camp before giving him a contract.

natural talent is there, work ethic/character/will hasn't been for a long time.

When he broke in the league reminded me of gonchar, once he was traded to Minny, what a disaster. Absolutely pylon, would make Alberts look elite defensively.


wouldn't have minded the buy-low, but don't understand the timing of this contract (so early).

ahmon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:10 PM
  #102
BerSTUzzi
Registered User
 
BerSTUzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,818
vCash: 500
Wow clearly the lack of Luongo movement is making us go crazy. I'm not at all a Cam Barker fan but he wasn't signed for 3 years, he wasn't signed for over a million, and he's not scheduled to be in our top 7 D. It's not like his lack of ability is going to rub off on other players.

BerSTUzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:11 PM
  #103
keslerburrows
Registered User
 
keslerburrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vernon, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,743
vCash: 500

keslerburrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:13 PM
  #104
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBIZ14 View Post
Seriously so many drama queens...this is a no risk signing and will have little effect on the teams ability to win or lose...7th d-men don't win championships.
7th dman implies that he will play at some point. Bad news, considering he couldnt hack it with the Oilers or Texas Stars.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:14 PM
  #105
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,753
vCash: 500
Being under $800k means we cab send him down without a cap hit right?

If so this is okay as long add it doesn't stop us from making another depth signing like Vandermeer.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:14 PM
  #106
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,384
vCash: 500
Yup, and no re-call waivers.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:15 PM
  #107
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,299
vCash: 500
I was reasonably sure this would happen, and it did. Much to the chagrin of many... (not me)

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:16 PM
  #108
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,697
vCash: 500
Arsenal lose, Seahawks getting pummelled, now this....bad mood for the rest of the day.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:18 PM
  #109
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
If you want to make the playoffs, don't you want Cam Barker in Chicago? Barker is a far better dman than Polasek at this point...

People are being harder on Barker than guys like Joslin because of where he was drafted. Of course he's pitiful in relation to what he was supposed to be. Doesn't mean he's pitiful compared to a guy like Derek Joslin. Joslin probably has zero NHL upside, yet we didn't see this type of reaction when he was signed.
No and highly questionable. Have you watched Barker in the AHL? Having Barker on the Wolves does not bring this team any closer to the playoffs, it brings even more inconsistency to a blueline that has struggled throughout the year. Polasek brings more to the table than Barker does, he is a much greater physical presence, which is lacking on the Wolves and can play decent defense.

Draft spot is no reflection of my concerns. His play on the ice is.

thefeebster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:18 PM
  #110
keslerburrows
Registered User
 
keslerburrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vernon, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Arsenal lose, Seahawks getting pummelled, now this....bad mood for the rest of the day.
Same.

keslerburrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:18 PM
  #111
The Kassian Train
228 LBS of Pain
 
The Kassian Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 500
Can't wait to see Barker prove you all wrong.

Edit: And if he sucks no big deal. *yawn*

The Kassian Train is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:21 PM
  #112
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Vandermeer is a FAR FAR FAR FAR better option than Barker. More skill, willingly fight, gritty, has character and leadership and WANTS to be here...

Maybe GMMG signed him because TML wants a depth D and we didn't want to give up Alberts?

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:23 PM
  #113
momo
Registered User
 
momo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Posts: 210
vCash: 500
I like this signing.

At the very least he can take Tanev's spot at Chicago. If canucks get lucky he can be a serviceable depth defenseman.

momo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:23 PM
  #114
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kassian Train View Post
Can't wait to see Barker prove you all wrong.

Edit: And if he sucks no big deal. *yawn*
Right, because the guy who was run out of town by the worst team in the league, and an AHL team to boot, is going to play well for us. Logical assumption.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:24 PM
  #115
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,135
vCash: 13357
Well, there is one positive. Say he scores a goal against Edmonton. I don't think they could ever live it down.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:26 PM
  #116
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
D depth has dropped off a cliff in a year

2011-12
Hamhuis Bieksa
Edler Salo
Ballard Rome
Alberts Sulzer
Tanev

2013
Hamhuis Bieksa
Edler Garrison
Ballard Tanev
Alberts Barker
Joslin?

So let's say for example in extreme situation the team has 3 injuries on D (more likely to happen after lockout/no pre season apparently) to the top 6. That leaves you with:

Hamhuis Sulzer
Edler Tanev
Alberts Rome

vs

Hamhuis Tanev
Edler Alberts
Barker Joslin?

For the past few years, the team has been losing dmen to free agency at an alarming rate, and the chickens is at risk of coming home to roost. D depth was taken for granted. Lost to free agency without significant compensation:

Weaver
Ohlund
Mitchell
Ehrhoff
Salo
Rome

That's an entire NHL D corps.

not to mention the Sulzer/Gragnani trade (I was optimistic until I saw Gragnani play)

Sorry to be a debbie downer but its true

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:27 PM
  #117
momo
Registered User
 
momo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Posts: 210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seatoo View Post
Vandermeer is a FAR FAR FAR FAR better option than Barker. More skill, willingly fight, gritty, has character and leadership and WANTS to be here...

Maybe GMMG signed him because TML wants a depth D and we didn't want to give up Alberts?
Barker also wants to be here. He signed here.

momo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:28 PM
  #118
The Kassian Train
228 LBS of Pain
 
The Kassian Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonderTwinsUnite View Post
Right, because the guy who was run out of town by the worst team in the league, and an AHL team to boot, is going to play well for us. Logical assumption.
Again, is Barker battling for a top 6 position? No.
He was asked to be released from the AHL team, you do know that right?

So in sense, yeah it is logical.

The Kassian Train is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:28 PM
  #119
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Two-way or one-way contract doesn't matter one bit, unless if you're really concerned over Aquillini's pocket book.

And unless I've misunderstood the new CBA, you absolutely can hide this contract in the minors. You are only charged for every dollar you spend over 900k, per contract. So at 700k this should be safe to hide in the minors.
I believe any contract in the minors over $300,000 counts against the Canucks cap under the new CBA.

This is a stupid move and it contributes to an overall pattern of horrible asset management - especially with our defencemen.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:29 PM
  #120
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,697
vCash: 500
Most teams wanting to win aren't looking to move guys for compensation.

I could care less about that.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:29 PM
  #121
Wellwood You
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 937
vCash: 500
Contending teams lose players to free agency without compensation at a higher rate than non-contending teams. That's because they can't sell them off at the Trade Deadline.

It's pretty simple.

Wellwood You is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:32 PM
  #122
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,769
vCash: 500
I don't care if Barker is just a #9 in our system, he's still in it.

Unless he made vast strides to improve his game, this guy will bite us in the ass whenever he hits the ice. Has a decent NHL toolkit but he makes Booth look like Gretzky out there in terms of IQ. I'd rather GMMG have kept MAG for depth instead of bringing up this guy.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:33 PM
  #123
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 15,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
No and highly questionable. Have you watched Barker in the AHL? Having Barker on the Wolves does not bring this team any closer to the playoffs, it brings even more inconsistency to a blueline that has struggled throughout the year. Polasek brings more to the table than Barker does, he is a much greater physical presence, which is lacking on the Wolves and can play decent defense.

Draft spot is no reflection of my concerns. His play on the ice is.
I don't know, when I watch the Wolves I'm always left wanting more offense and puck movement from the defense. And it shows up in the stat sheet. The teams 4th highest point producer on the backend is Derek Joslin with 5 points in 30 games. Is Barker going to be worse on the PP than what's already there? I have a hard time imagining he would be, though I can't say I've watched Barker at the AHL level.

Not convinced Polasek is beter than Barker at that level either. I guess we'll have to wait and see which player the coaching staff thinks gives the team the best chance to win...

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:35 PM
  #124
Wellwood You
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silvercanuck View Post
I believe any contract in the minors over $300,000 counts against the Canucks cap under the new CBA.

This is a stupid move and it contributes to an overall pattern of horrible asset management - especially with our defencemen.
Incorrect.

Quote:
Money paid to Players on NHL SPCs (one-ways and two-ways) in another professional league will not be counted against the Players’ Share, but will be counted against the NHL Club’s Averaged Club Salary for the period during which such Player is loaned to another professional league as follows:
a) In the case of a one-way SPC, the AA of such SPC less the then applicable NHL Minimum Salary plus $375,000 (e.g., currently $900,000) will be counted against the Club’s Averaged Club Salary, or
Only 1 way contracts above $900K will count against the cap if the player is sent down.

Wellwood You is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 01:36 PM
  #125
Bitz and Bites
Registered User
 
Bitz and Bites's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Well, there is one positive. Say he scores a goal against Edmonton. I don't think they could ever live it down.

Even better if it's the GWG that knocks the Oilers out of playoff contention...
That would be poetic...

Bitz and Bites 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 07:56 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.