HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread (Part Nine)

View Poll Results: Sign him or not
Try-out contract 7 31.82%
1 year contract 9 40.91%
Just no !!!!!!!!!!!!! 6 27.27%
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2011, 03:33 PM
  #201
CanucksOo
Registered User
 
CanucksOo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 6,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post


I'd be interested in Parros depending on the price.
That's a great gif. He'd fit right into our team


Last edited by CanucksOo: 12-20-2011 at 04:36 PM.
CanucksOo is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 03:37 PM
  #202
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
If we acquired Parros he might make us a tougher team on paper but he absolutely would not make us a tougher team on the ice.

He was 22nd on the 2007 Cup-winning Ducks in ice time, dressed in just five games and had 10 minutes in penalties - and that's not from two fights or a misconduct, it's from taking five minors in his less than 20 minutes.

He was credited with three body checks though, so.. that's something.

(And keep in mind that the Ducks were widely acknowledged to be a three line team.. Parros still couldn't crack the lineup on a regular basis.)
Ya, ya. I'm aware of the stats. You aren't picking up freaking Milan Lucic here. He'd probably cost a lower end draft pick, and makes $875k. Wouldn't be a bad option to have in the holster if guys like Marchand start punching Sedins in the face. Plus you're referencing a playoff run from like 5-6 years ago, and the Ducks weren't missing toughness anyways.

Other thing to consider, these 'tough' type players seem to have resurgences when they're moved. Kind of a 'wake up' call that they have to earn their ice-time. Obviously, they tend to marginally regress as they settle into teams (which is why the turn-over happens).

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:12 PM
  #203
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
DBR is correct. Essentially, you need a guy that can play. Parros won't play often enough to be a factor.


Parros is not going to deter Marchand punching a Sedin. He won't be on the ice. No, the only thing that will stop Marchand in that instance is Sedin defending himself.


There was a report from *hewhomustnotbenamed* that the nucks were interested in Brassard. Now that is a good target. He has the skill and versatility to play anywhere on the roster. A natural playmaker, he could be one that facilitates offense with guys like Kesler, while pushing Higgins down the depth chart to pair up with Hodgson. He would make a great addition. Of course, Ballard would have to be going the other way to make it work.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:20 PM
  #204
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
Ya, ya. I'm aware of the stats. You aren't picking up freaking Milan Lucic here. He'd probably cost a lower end draft pick, and makes $875k. Wouldn't be a bad option to have in the holster if guys like Marchand start punching Sedins in the face. Plus you're referencing a playoff run from like 5-6 years ago, and the Ducks weren't missing toughness anyways.

Other thing to consider, these 'tough' type players seem to have resurgences when they're moved. Kind of a 'wake up' call that they have to earn their ice-time. Obviously, they tend to marginally regress as they settle into teams (which is why the turn-over happens).
How is George Parros going to do anything to Brad Marchand (or anyone else) if he can barely get into the lineup - let alone on the ice at a key point in a playoff game?

And fine, yeah, that playoff run was four years ago. What's he done since then to suggest he's any better?

The year after he got into just one of six playoff games, and since then as the Ducks have been dismantled and become a two line team he's finally started to get into the lineup (although he's still been scratched for 1/3 of their playoff games since then), heck he even got into his only career NHL playoff fight with Douglas Murray - of course for a guy who has no contribution other than his fists he didn't do particularly well but that's neither here nor there.

I don't know. I guess personally I would love for this team to get tougher but in order to do that they have to get players who can play that are tougher than the players who are currently regulars in our lineup. Making our fourth line vastly worse in order to make it tougher seems pretty pointless to me.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:29 PM
  #205
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I don't know. I guess personally I would love for this team to get tougher but in order to do that they have to get players who can play that are tougher than the players who are currently regulars in our lineup. Making our fourth line vastly worse in order to make it tougher seems pretty pointless to me.
Yes, I'm sure we would all prefer an ideal acquisition. Some guy who can play 10-12 minutes of defensively responsible hockey and fight. But it won't happen. If you want guys who can 'play' just stack the line-up and have a fourth line of Malhotra-Lapierre-Weise and be done with it.

No legitimate assets will be spent on forwards this year. The only element we really need in our entire top 12 is toughness...which is why a relatively low-skill hockey player like Volpatti was able to be a fixture in our line-up until injury. If any acquisition is made on the forward front it will be a low cost, low salary player.

The top need for this team remains on the blue line, and I expect our trade activities to be geared towards that goal more so then anything else. Any forward acquisitions will just involve low round picks. And I see above this a recommendation to move Ballard for a guy like Brassard?! I mean, how counter-intuitive is that one.


Last edited by Bobby Lou: 12-20-2011 at 04:36 PM.
Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:37 PM
  #206
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,307
vCash: 500
I don't know if we'll even do that, with our cap situation (barring a season-ending injury to a player with a big cap hit).

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:47 PM
  #207
Eddy Punch Clock
Gold Jerry!!!
 
Eddy Punch Clock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chillbillyville
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
How is George Parros going to do anything to Brad Marchand (or anyone else) if he can barely get into the lineup - let alone on the ice at a key point in a playoff game?
He's got a bad ass moustache though. I'd think a guy with a name like yours would appreciate a thing like that.

Eddy Punch Clock is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:52 PM
  #208
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
Yes, I'm sure we would all prefer an ideal acquisition. Some guy who can play 10-12 minutes of defensively responsible hockey and fight. But it won't happen. If you want guys who can 'play' just stack the line-up and have a fourth line of Malhotra-Lapierre-Weise and be done with it.

No legitimate assets will be spent on forwards this year. The only element we really need in our entire top 12 is toughness...which is why a relatively low-skill hockey player like Volpatti was able to be a fixture in our line-up until injury. If any acquisition is made on the forward front it will be a low cost, low salary player.

The top need for this team remains on the blue line, and I expect our trade activities to be geared towards that goal more so then anything else. Any forward acquisitions will just involve low round picks. And I see above this a recommendation to move Ballard for a guy like Brassard?! I mean, how counter-intuitive is that one.

Counter-intuitive I agree. The D is the main need. However, that deal would be made with the intent to improve the D with other moves. Not to mention that if CLB and VAN view Brassard as having very little value due to trade request and hefty 3.2m contract for 19 projected points, then more would have to come from CLB to make the deal work. In other words, perhaps VAN can pry a Moore, Golobeuf, or Savard along with Brassard in a deal. Unlikely I know, but Brassard's value should be very low. The prospect addition would be seen to balance the deal.


Really, it comes to getting good players. In that sense, a Brassard addition is logical. Parros is not a good hockey player. So in that understanding, he makes a poor acquisition. Getting a younger D prospect also seems logical. So it's only counter-intuitive if you see a Brassard for Ballard swap as all-inclusive.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 04:53 PM
  #209
Kagee*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy Punch Clock View Post
He's got a bad ass moustache though. I'd think a guy with a name like yours would appreciate a thing like that.
nice one.

If all the pending rentals become too expensive like (Moen etc) acquiring Parros would suffice to help us down the stretch, with a few spot games in the playoffs.

Kagee* is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:06 PM
  #210
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Counter-intuitive I agree. The D is the main need. However, that deal would be made with the intent to improve the D with other moves. Not to mention that if CLB and VAN view Brassard as having very little value due to trade request and hefty 3.2m contract for 19 projected points, then more would have to come from CLB to make the deal work. In other words, perhaps VAN can pry a Moore, Golobeuf, or Savard along with Brassard in a deal. Unlikely I know, but Brassard's value should be very low. The prospect addition would be seen to balance the deal.

Really, it comes to getting good players. In that sense, a Brassard addition is logical. Parros is not a good hockey player. So in that understanding, he makes a poor acquisition. Getting a younger D prospect also seems logical. So it's only counter-intuitive if you see a Brassard for Ballard swap as all-inclusive.
The absolutely only way a Brassard acquisition makes any sense is if for some reason CBJ accepts Ballard's deal in return (though apparently Columbus doesn't want salary in return, just picks/prospects), and we then proceed to move Hodgson to shore up the blue line, and replace him with Brassard. Well I could see this from a fantasy GM point of view, there is no way management shakes up the team to that degree just to fix the blue line when we can most likely just keep Ballard/Hodgson and improve the bottom pairing without moving anyone of substance. We also have a number of more effective players on better contracts in our top nine (Raymond, Hansen, Higgins, Hodgson)...so I don't see where Brassard fits otherwise.

Regarding Parros, I agree he isn't like Lucic or something. He can handle 5-7 minutes with solid linemates though, and our fourth line should consist of Malhotra-Lapierre and whatever sort of tough influence you'd like on the RW. I actually don't mind Weise's skill level, but since there is absolutely no way they scratch Malhotra it's Weise you have to upgrade if you want toughness...all the other top 12 forward spots are spoken for when Booth returns. I just think, as far as forwards go, we'll be looking at more of a part-time player to sub-in with a guy like Weise if we need toughness. Someone who costs relatively little in assets, and takes up a non-intrusive amount of salary space.

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:20 PM
  #211
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,269
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
DBR is correct. Essentially, you need a guy that can play. Parros won't play often enough to be a factor.


Parros is not going to deter Marchand punching a Sedin. He won't be on the ice. No, the only thing that will stop Marchand in that instance is Sedin defending himself.


There was a report from *hewhomustnotbenamed* that the nucks were interested in Brassard. Now that is a good target. He has the skill and versatility to play anywhere on the roster. A natural playmaker, he could be one that facilitates offense with guys like Kesler, while pushing Higgins down the depth chart to pair up with Hodgson. He would make a great addition. Of course, Ballard would have to be going the other way to make it work.
Or Parros going after and taking a run at Bergeron...If they want to attack our star players, we shall retaliate.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:21 PM
  #212
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy Punch Clock View Post
He's got a bad ass moustache though. I'd think a guy with a name like yours would appreciate a thing like that.
True enough Eddy. I'd definitely like him here as a Movember ringer. He could have all the filet of fishies he could eat.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:32 PM
  #213
gsharpe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 556
vCash: 500
Appaeently Stewart is available. What about Ballard for Stewart? Or Ballard + Schneider for Stewart +?

gsharpe is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:36 PM
  #214
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,699
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsharpe View Post
Appaeently Stewart is available. What about Ballard for Stewart? Or Ballard + Schneider for Stewart +?
Chris Stewart should only be brought in if a forward was going the other way. We need a Dman badly, not subtract another one.

LiquidSnake is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:38 PM
  #215
Timmer44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Van City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,196
vCash: 400
How about Travis Moen. If we can't land Neil, can Moen be a guy we can put out to take a few runs at the Seabrook/Keith's of the league?

Timmer44 is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:45 PM
  #216
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,805
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmer44 View Post
How about Travis Moen. If we can't land Neil, can Moen be a guy we can put out to take a few runs at the Seabrook/Keith's of the league?
I'd love to get a package of Gill and Moen from the Habs, but Moen's value is at a all time high right now, so it will cost too much IMO.

Horvat2Virtanen is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:53 PM
  #217
gsharpe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmer44 View Post
How about Travis Moen. If we can't land Neil, can Moen be a guy we can put out to take a few runs at the Seabrook/Keith's of the league?
Id get him. No idea what his price is though

gsharpe is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 05:59 PM
  #218
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmer44 View Post
How about Travis Moen. If we can't land Neil, can Moen be a guy we can put out to take a few runs at the Seabrook/Keith's of the league?

Ya, I sense he's going to be coveted at the deadline and cost a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if Montreal is looking at retaining him either considering he's pretty much the only gritty player on that team. Also probably a bit more then we're looking to add salary-wise at forward. I also think Gillis established a ceiling for his price on potential rentals last year with the 3rd rounders and fringe prospects he traded for Lapierre and Higgins.


Last edited by Bobby Lou: 12-20-2011 at 06:07 PM.
Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 06:31 PM
  #219
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
The absolutely only way a Brassard acquisition makes any sense is if for some reason CBJ accepts Ballard's deal in return (though apparently Columbus doesn't want salary in return, just picks/prospects), and we then proceed to move Hodgson to shore up the blue line, and replace him with Brassard. Well I could see this from a fantasy GM point of view, there is no way management shakes up the team to that degree just to fix the blue line when we can most likely just keep Ballard/Hodgson and improve the bottom pairing without moving anyone of substance. We also have a number of more effective players on better contracts in our top nine (Raymond, Hansen, Higgins, Hodgson)...so I don't see where Brassard fits otherwise.

Regarding Parros, I agree he isn't like Lucic or something. He can handle 5-7 minutes with solid linemates though, and our fourth line should consist of Malhotra-Lapierre and whatever sort of tough influence you'd like on the RW. I actually don't mind Weise's skill level, but since there is absolutely no way they scratch Malhotra it's Weise you have to upgrade if you want toughness...all the other top 12 forward spots are spoken for when Booth returns. I just think, as far as forwards go, we'll be looking at more of a part-time player to sub-in with a guy like Weise if we need toughness. Someone who costs relatively little in assets, and takes up a non-intrusive amount of salary space.

I hear you. On the surface of things, it looks like a depth forward is all we'll be looking for. I know what you are saying. In fact, MG tried to get Cam Janssen this offseason I believe. So even he sees a need for this type of forward. The difference is that Janssen is more a middle-weight that can give you 10min a night. To contrast, Parros is a heavy-weight that gives you 5min maybe... mixed in with playing 1 of every 5 games in playoffs. This is rather significant. While Janssen actually pushes the team agenda and can fight, Parros only does the latter. In the end, Janssen's toughness is more valuable.


Saying all this, a guy like Tim Jackman might be more of a fit than Parros. He can actually play. I'd be up for getting a player like that. He'd sub in for Weise where necessary. To me, he make a much better target.


On the Brassard thing, you would have to think CLB would have huge interest in a guy like Ballard. Reports say they don't want to take salary back, but that doesn't mean they absolutely will not if they feel a better player is coming back. Ballard would be a huge boost for them. What's more valuable? Salary space or a good asset long-term? In Brassard, they have an anchor contract they want to get rid of. Are you telling me they refuse a good asset coming back for cap space? Highly doubtful. Oh, and Hodgson doesn't need to be dealt if CLB sends a prospect D coming back.


Let's be clear though, the reason people want to "fix" the D is because they're not comfortable with the Alberts and Ballard. Now, you likely aren't trading Ballard for a D straight across and coming out better. So deal him for a struggling forward + D prospect. Then, try to make another minor move to shore up the D further. Point being, a piece that doesn't work here is moved for pieces that are likely to work here, and then you move from there.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 06:48 PM
  #220
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I hear you. On the surface of things, it looks like a depth forward is all we'll be looking for. I know what you are saying. In fact, MG tried to get Cam Janssen this offseason I believe. So even he sees a need for this type of forward. The difference is that Janssen is more a middle-weight that can give you 10min a night. To contrast, Parros is a heavy-weight that gives you 5min maybe... mixed in with playing 1 of every 5 games in playoffs. This is rather significant. While Janssen actually pushes the team agenda and can fight, Parros only does the latter. In the end, Janssen's toughness is more valuable.
I'd write off Jackman because there is no way the Flames trade us that sort of player who is that effective; they'd want to keep Jackman as far away from the Canucks as possible I'd think. Only way he's an option is if he somehow makes it to free agency.

See, the Janssen and Boulton things are what I'm looking at when I consider Parros. What makes you think Janssen is a better hockey player? If anything he's not as tough, and potentially worse from a regular hockey stand point. Dudes, somehow playing under 5 minutes per game in New Jersey, and has even less post-season experience. Boulton, at 35 years old, is a pure knuckle-duster; not only that, he's a fighter whose fights per season have been declining, and if I recall he got beat-up by Darcy Hordichuk last year. Both these guys are pure goons, who we were only after to fight. Neither of them can log a pure hockey shift any better then Parros.

I wouldn't be surprised if we got one either; they cost next to nothing asset and salary wise and Gillis seems to want to have one around at least. Boulton or Janssen might even be available out of NJ for the right price, Eager hasn't been performing in Edmonton, Parros might be available, Jared Boll could also potentially.

Bobby Lou is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 07:46 PM
  #221
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
I'd write off Jackman because there is no way the Flames trade us that sort of player who is that effective; they'd want to keep Jackman as far away from the Canucks as possible I'd think. Only way he's an option is if he somehow makes it to free agency.

See, the Janssen and Boulton things are what I'm looking at when I consider Parros. What makes you think Janssen is a better hockey player? If anything he's not as tough, and potentially worse from a regular hockey stand point. Dudes, somehow playing under 5 minutes per game in New Jersey, and has even less post-season experience. Boulton, at 35 years old, is a pure knuckle-duster; not only that, he's a fighter whose fights per season have been declining, and if I recall he got beat-up by Darcy Hordichuk last year. Both these guys are pure goons, who we were only after to fight. Neither of them can log a pure hockey shift any better then Parros.

I wouldn't be surprised if we got one either; they cost next to nothing asset and salary wise and Gillis seems to want to have one around at least. Boulton or Janssen might even be available out of NJ for the right price, Eager hasn't been performing in Edmonton, Parros might be available, Jared Boll could also potentially.

When comparing Parros to Janssen the difference is marginal. I'd say Janssen is a better skater, and better on the forecheck. Parros is the better fighter. Again, the difference is marginal but I'd be more comfortable with Janssen taking the Volpatti role than I would Parros.


On that point, I think Janssen would be cheaper to acquire. He signed a two-way contract this past year. DeBoer has really limited his role in NJ as well. Shouldn't cost much.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 08:51 PM
  #222
kushh
Registered User
 
kushh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
ballard, alberts, schneider, ellington
for
okposo, reasoner, de haan, nabokov



CAPGEEK.COM CAP CALCULATOR

Daniel Sedin ($6.100m) / Henrik Sedin ($6.100m) / Alexandre Burrows ($2.000m)
David Booth ($4.250m) / Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) / Chris Higgins ($1.900m)
Mason Raymond ($2.550m) / Cody Hodgson ($1.666m) / Kyle Okposo ($2.800m)
Jannik Hansen ($1.350m) / Marty Reasoner ($1.350m) / Maxim Lapierre ($1.000m)
Byron Bitz ($0.700m) / Manny Malhotra ($2.500m) / Dale Weise ($0.605m)

Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m) / Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m)
Alexander Edler ($3.250m) / Sami Salo ($2.000m)
Chris Tanev ($0.900m) / Calvin de Haan ($1.470m)
Aaron Rome ($0.750m) / Alexander Sulzer ($0.700m)

Roberto Luongo ($5.333m) / Evgeni Nabokov ($0.570m)

SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $63,944,999; BONUSES: $1,450,000
CAP SPACE (25-man roster): $355,001


Add a cheap dman or two and were set

kushh is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 08:53 PM
  #223
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,692
vCash: 500
That's not a great trade for the Islanders...

LickTheEnvelope is online now  
Old
12-20-2011, 09:15 PM
  #224
NugentHopkinsfan
Registered User
 
NugentHopkinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,087
vCash: 500
Is George Parros worse at hockey than Volpatti? I don't think so. We were winning games with Volpatti, having Parros instead of him would not weaken us and at least we'd have an answer for the Shawn Thorntons of the world who come in during a series and do whatever they want to us.

''But Shawn Thornton can't stop Lapierre and Burrows from being pests'' oh wait you don't hear the Bruins fans say that. Instead you hear them say, ''bringing Shawn Thronton into the series was a fantastic move that really helped!''

I'd love a tough top 6 forward more than anything but that won't happen so if we add somebody with some muscle who plays 5-7 a night I'm fine with it. He's also a character guy with a cup ring and he knows how to do his job.

NugentHopkinsfan is offline  
Old
12-20-2011, 09:17 PM
  #225
Nuckles
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ ( ͡ ᴥ͡)
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Potato
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,982
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
That's not a great trade for the Islanders...
And it gives the Canucks too much unnecessary forward depth and not enough defensive depth.

Nuckles is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:10 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.