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 Samuelsson

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-03-2009, 04:54 PM
  #401
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,300
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
I call GOODNESS

- The ability to shoot the puck into a 5-inch hole from 100 feet away
- The ability to skate at 100mph.
- The determination to score 5 goals a game. Every game.
- The strength to stay on your skates even as 5 players are holding on to you.

How many players on our team fit those characteristics? How many are Canadian?

Rotting Corpse* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:54 PM
  #402
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Not a big fan at that price. Under $2 million I would have been happy.
Detroit apparently was offering $1.5 on a shorter term according to a report I posted earlier.

$2.5 million seems tad steep but then there was likely a bidding war.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:54 PM
  #403
dmacgreg37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by digger18 View Post
Toughness is not overrated, it's become under-appreciated. That my friend, is really a shame.

It's all coming together. Notre Dame - Fighting Irish - Irish - Toughness - Brian Burke, why didn't you just use your own name??

dmacgreg37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:54 PM
  #404
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knucklez View Post
How is anything that happened in the early 1900s relevant in today's NHL?
You should define the parameters of the discussion better then.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:55 PM
  #405
Rotang
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I call GOODNESS

- The ability to shoot the puck into a 5-inch hole from 100 feet away
- The ability to skate at 100mph.
- The determination to score 5 goals a game. Every game.
- The strength to stay on your skates even as 5 players are holding on to you.

How many players on our team fit those characteristics? How many are Canadian?
I think this post made reading through 17 pages worth it.

Rotang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:55 PM
  #406
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I'm not even remotely sensitive. I don't care if you want to insult them, but calling them "sisters" is not only immature, stupid and demonstrating of a pathetic lack of creativity, but it is completely incorrect. They are not weak players. Call someone a sister who is weak. It's idiotic to call two of the strongest players on the team "sisters."
That's your opinion, but clearly it affects you when people say it, maybe even angers you. I call that sensitive. To each their own.

I don't think they are close to the strongest players on the team. How do you measure strength? I would not even call them strong on the puck. I would say that they play a style where they try to avoid being hit more than rubbing out pucks in the boards, as people typically characterize. Any case, again to each their own, and this is not what the thread is about.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:56 PM
  #407
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I call GOODNESS

- The ability to shoot the puck into a 5-inch hole from 100 feet away
- The ability to skate at 100mph.
- The determination to score 5 goals a game. Every game.
- The strength to stay on your skates even as 5 players are holding on to you.

How many players on our team fit those characteristics? How many are Canadian?
whoa, are you gauging respect with this post?

Do you respect yourself after posting this drivel?

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:56 PM
  #408
Knucklez
Registered User
 
Knucklez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Behind the bench!
Posts: 5,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
You should define the parameters of the discussion better then.
I said "last ten years".

Knucklez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:58 PM
  #409
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knucklez View Post
I said "last ten years".
" Originally Posted by Knucklez View Post
Most of the teams you call "tough" fall flat on their faces in the playoffs every year. Calgary and San Jose especially.

My point stands that teams that are considered physical more than anything else almost never win cups."

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:58 PM
  #410
P Dog
 
P Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I call GOODNESS

- The ability to shoot the puck into a 5-inch hole from 100 feet away
- The ability to skate at 100mph.
- The determination to score 5 goals a game. Every game.
- The strength to stay on your skates even as 5 players are holding on to you.

How many players on our team fit those characteristics? How many are Canadian?

WTF....Lol are you for real

P Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 04:59 PM
  #411
Rotting Corpse*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,300
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rotting Corpse* Send a message via MSN to Rotting Corpse*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
That's your opinion, but clearly it affects you when people say it, maybe even angers you. I call that sensitive. To each their own.
I roll my eyes and think the person talking is a moron. It "affects" me in the sense that everything affects everything.


Quote:
I don't think they are close to the strongest players on the team. How do you measure strength? I would not even call them strong on the puck. I would say that they play a style where they try to avoid being hit more than rubbing out pucks in the boards, as people typically characterize. Any case, again to each their own, and this is not what the thread is about.
I think the ability to go into the corners and take as much abuse as they do every single game and do it 82+ games every single year makes them very strong. It's not just luck that they are never injured, it's also a testament to thir strength and fitness.

Rotting Corpse* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:00 PM
  #412
digger18
Registered User
 
digger18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Williams Lake B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I call GOODNESS

- The ability to shoot the puck into a 5-inch hole from 100 feet away
- The ability to skate at 100mph.
- The determination to score 5 goals a game. Every game.
- The strength to stay on your skates even as 5 players are holding on to you.

How many players on our team fit those characteristics? How many are Canadian?
Is there a player on the planet who can do all those things?

digger18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:00 PM
  #413
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc View Post
Canucks on the whole don't seem to use a physical hard-hitting style. Even physical, hard hitting players don't seem so on the nucks. I think it has something to do with AVs system.
I think that has something to do with it but I don't think it's the whole story. You see early in the season and early in the playoff series' that the big forecheckers ramp it up. Then as the series goes on or the season they revert to typical patterns. That indicates to me that AV is telling people to play a big physical game then it starts to wear off. Who would you call and "underachiever" in hitting for the Canucks? Remember a team like Philadelphia who prizes their physical roots might try to inflate hit stats a bit, as they usually vary from rink to rink.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:03 PM
  #414
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 14,008
vCash: 500
I'm wondering how many of the people calling Samuelsson 'soft' have really watched him play much.

This guy plays an involved game, throws hits, is always mixing it up after the whistle, is 6'2" 215. And has a Cup ring and a reputation as a clutch playoff performer. If his name was Mike Samuels and otherwise the exact same player, the same couple people whining loudest about the 'Team Sweden!' stuff would be having a collective orgasm right now. He's really not a much different player from, say, Mike Knuble.

There are certainly question marks with this signing - length of the contract, amount of forwards we now have, etc. - but this *does not* make our team softer. Quite the opposite, in fact.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:03 PM
  #415
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I think you are completely mis-interpreting my argument. I'm a fan of the Sedins, I wanted them resigned, and I think they are top line players.

That said, I think that when you have a couple players like the Sedins, you have to be frank about what is needed in the top 6 to create a proper mix.

Right now we have

Sedin Sedin Burrows

Kesler Demitra Samuelsson

To me, that simply isn't a great mix.


The argument is if we can really label the Sedins as "tough players". I see them as solid first line players willing to take immeasurable abuse to make a play. I also see their willingness to work in the rough areas to produce scoring chances.

But they aren't aggressive players, while their net presence is decent it isn't overwhelming for goaltenders, and their physical presence is near zero. These are things that need to be made up by the remaining players in your top 6.


Acknowledging the flaws of your team and players doesn't make you a bad fan. It makes you a fan with the ability to think critically about your team and the balance it needs to win.
I agree with most of this, but I don't think the problem is as big as you're suggesting.

I think that Samuelsson will get every opportunity to play with the Sedins next year. Burrows was great there, but he's a guy who's effective in the lineup without having to play with the Sedins. I think that Burrows on the 2nd unit with Kesler gives us that grit and sandpaper we need in a top 6 unit, while letting the Sedins do what they do best - generate offense.

Daniel-Henrik-Samuelsson line isn't too soft that they can't generate 1st line offense for the Canucks... and if there's chemistry there, which at least on paper should be there, then they could be a good, consistent #1 line for the Canucks. While Samuelsson is not a top line player, and could even be considered a questionable top 6 guy, this line has always been, and will always be, about the Sedins - so give them a guy who brings the intangibles they need (good along the boards, plays a "smart" positional game, shoots first, right handed shot) and let them deliver the offense we need from that top line.

Burrows and Kesler we know have chemistry. They have both improved their games to the point where they're no longer weak top 6 players - of course the hope is that last season wasn't a career year, and both these guys can still deliver 20-25 goals, 50-60pts. A good fit with them will give us a solid 2nd line. Hodgson is likely that fit long-term... right now it's Demitra - and he's basically that weak link now in the top 6.

I do believe however that this would be a good mix with the Sedins in our top 6.... Kesler and Burrows as the polar opposites of the Sedins, and they bring the intangibles that the Sedins don't, while the Sedins bring the offense that these guys don't. As long as Kesler and Burrows can continue to deliver 2nd line offense for this team, our top 6 should be in good shape. And we do have several young players and prospects that can complement those 2 "duos" over the longterm - with hopefully Hodgson being able to take that role in a year, Raymond is also going to challenge for a top 6 spot in the coming years, while Schroeder, Grabner, and possibly Shirokov and Rodin are all possible longterm options for the top 6.

I think the bigger concern now is the bottom 6 (considering the forwards only at least). Not enough skill on the 4th line, and not enough grit on the 3rd. But again, bring in 2 of the "right" players to fill those roles and I think our forward lines look pretty good.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:03 PM
  #416
Knucklez
Registered User
 
Knucklez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Behind the bench!
Posts: 5,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
" Originally Posted by Knucklez View Post
Most of the teams you call "tough" fall flat on their faces in the playoffs every year. Calgary and San Jose especially.

My point stands that teams that are considered physical more than anything else almost never win cups."
Sigh. This was a continuation of the post before it, where I said last ten years. Threads are ongoing discussions, I didn't think I had to clarify.

Knucklez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:04 PM
  #417
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotiabank View Post
I roll my eyes and think the person talking is a moron. It "affects" me in the sense that everything affects everything.




I think the ability to go into the corners and take as much abuse as they do every single game and do it 82+ games every single year makes them very strong. It's not just luck that they are never injured, it's also a testament to thir strength and fitness.
You are still wound up and resorting to flaming, yet you are supposedly so superior that you don't resort to such childish name calling. I think you are best served to use the ignore button if you can't have a decent conversation about hockey.

It's a testament to their fitness perhaps. My girlfriend works out 5 times a week and is in excellent shape. She is not stronger than me though by a long shot. Fitness and conditioning do not necessarily equal strength.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:09 PM
  #418
P Dog
 
P Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14
vCash: 500
I think what most people are saying is that historically a Swede is a more passive Player with the exception of a few
This trend is changing but for the most part they arent as pyshical as other Nationalilities

thats why people were calling the Sedins ...." Sisters " ...because when the came into the League they were under developed...they could barely hold the heads up with their pencil necks

P Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:10 PM
  #419
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
I'm wondering how many of the people calling Samuelsson 'soft' have really watched him play much.

This guy plays an involved game, throws hits, is always mixing it up after the whistle, is 6'2" 215. And has a Cup ring and a reputation as a clutch playoff performer. If his name was Mike Samuels and otherwise the exact same player, the same couple people whining loudest about the 'Team Sweden!' stuff would be having a collective orgasm right now. He's really not a much different player from, say, Mike Knuble.

There are certainly question marks with this signing - length of the contract, amount of forwards we now have, etc. - but this *does not* make our team softer. Quite the opposite, in fact.
I can agree with this. I think it comes down to people thinking Swede = not cabable of playing a grinding game. I also think that on HF boards if the Canucks acquire a player over 25, then he needs to be a superstar to be accepted as a valuable addition. Otherwise, the unproven "kids" should be given such spots etc etc.

I think Samuelsson is a good addition. I think that maybe some people are like myself in that, we're seeing how the team is shaping up and are hoping for some element of toughness that we don't yet have.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:11 PM
  #420
digger18
Registered User
 
digger18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Williams Lake B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Things I like about the signing..
Brings Cup experience to the room, somehting we desperately needed.

Things I dont like.....
The contract itself, 2 years at 2.5 M maybe....3 years should have been capped at 2 M.
It's a roster spot that we should be reserving for our younger players at this point.

Now Gillis could make this headache go away very quickly if he turns around and Extends Luongo, Kesler then deals Demitra, Hansen, Grabner and a 1st to Columbus for Rick Nash. And Sends Schnieder to Chicago for Barker.

digger18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:12 PM
  #421
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lambofgod View Post
When I first looked at this thread I was half asleep and thought we had signed Ulf.
Yea if there was one thing that would make me turn in my Canuck fan card....

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:13 PM
  #422
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,271
vCash: 500
Still there's gotta be a trade coming...

- H. Sedin
- D. Sedin
- Burrows
- Kesler
- Demitra
- Bernier
- Raymond
- Samuelsson
- Rypien
- Hordichuk
- Johnson

- Hansen
- Hodgson
- Grabner
- Wellwood
- Possibly Shirokov

Way too many... I can see two or three moved to bring in a better sniper 'style' winger.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:14 PM
  #423
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
For those people who like the hit stat, Samuelsson outhit every forward on the Canucks except for Hordichuk and Bernier last year.
Other stats compared to Canucks forwards:

Average TOI 15:22 (#6 Sundin - 16:50 and #7 Pyatt - 14:42)

Shots - 257 (#1 by a mile Daniel Sedin - 285 and #2 Kesler #174)

Shooting percentage - 7.4% (#16 Raymond - 7.6%)

Blocked shots - 23 (#7 Hansen - 20)

Do not expect him to kill penalties - 1:04 the whole season while the Wings were shorthanded.

Power play time per game - 2:24 (#6 Bernier 2:30 and #7 Kesler 2:23)

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:15 PM
  #424
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Yea if there was one thing that would make me turn in my Canuck fan card....
Hey now, he`s plenty gritty

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2009, 05:19 PM
  #425
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Still there's gotta be a trade coming...

- H. Sedin
- D. Sedin
- Burrows
- Kesler
- Demitra
- Bernier
- Raymond
- Samuelsson
- Rypien
- Hordichuk
- Johnson

- Hansen
- Hodgson
- Grabner
- Wellwood
- Possibly Shirokov

Way too many... I can see two or three moved to bring in a better sniper 'style' winger.
Daniel - Henrik - Samuelsson
Burrows - Kesler - Demitra
Raymond - Hodgson - Bernier
Hordichuk - Johnson - Hansen
Rypien; Wellwood

Grabner and Shirokov start in the AHL.

no other players there....

It looks like just 1 spot that you need to trade - Wellwood or Hansen basically... but again, that's only if Hodgson earns a regular spot in camp... and you can't give Grabner or Shirokov (if he's even coming over???) those spots yet either. If they earn them in camp, make moves then, but there's probably still a better chance that they don't make the team.

If the Canucks have any extra forwards, it's just 1 right now... but still a big hole on defense, maybe 2, and about $4mill in cap space left.

NFITO 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 08:28 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.