Grabner wouldn't have made the team so he would have been moved anyways or waived. INstead the canucks got a D-man that tonight is going to play well over 20 minutes because of injuries. Exactly the depth the canucks wanted to have in the top 5.
....AND they dumped $2 million in salary. Granted, it was correcting a mistake made in the first place by Gillis; but we all know every GM makes mistakes. They key is, he was able to fix the problem.
Last edited by Barney Gumble: 01-26-2011 at 11:24 PM.
AV and Gillis speak very favourably about Grabner. If we could've kept him, I think they would've started the season with the Raymond/Kesler/Grabner line. Still, Ballard will be a key for the team over the next few years.
AV and Gillis speak very favourably about Grabner. If we could've kept him, I think they would've started the season with the Raymond/Kesler/Grabner line. Still, Ballard will be a key for the team over the next few years.
But I think they were pretty certain they were going to remake their 3rd line, and with Samuelsson and Hansen in the picture and Hodgson, Schroeder and Shirokov expected to compete, Grabner was a guy who had to either make the team out of training camp or be lost because there was no way he would clear waivers.
58th overall in NHL goals, 202nd in points and on pace for about 8-9 assists this season.
Nothing special, especially for a guy who has been a pro for 5 years. I don't think his upside is much higher.
Man, I have no problem with the trade but I hate replies like this that aim to skew stats so as to portray a player in the most unflattering light. "58th in goals"? How about 4th in rookie goals? "On pace for 8 or 9 assists"? How about also on pace for nearly 30 goals too? "A pro for 5 years" but still just 23 years old. Funny too all the crap he takes for being streaky or redundant in our awesome top 6 then realize we have a 26 year old career minor leaguer who has 1 point in his last 14 games or so (Tambellini) or another guy who scored 1/3 of all his goals this year in a single game (Raymond), but noooo we certainly have no room for a bum like Grabner, eh? Wow, some people are just so bloody thick that it just boggles the mind.
I think they gave up on him too quick. Maybe one of the only moves of Gillis that I didn't agree with. I thought at the time and still think that Florida would have took Bernier and a high pick for Ballard. Grabner showed some chemistry last year with Kesler and Raymond and looks like he is still improving.
I have a problem with these GM's overvaluing 1st and 2nd round picks. They are willing to give up a 1st round pick that they have 3 years invested in but not one that they have not even used yet. It just makes no sense.
So do I want a streaky one-dimensional forward that would have difficulty cracking our top six... or do I want an established physical three zone top four defenseman? Hmm...
I think they gave up on him too quick. Maybe one of the only moves of Gillis that I didn't agree with. I thought at the time and still think that Florida would have took Bernier and a high pick for Ballard. Grabner showed some chemistry last year with Kesler and Raymond and looks like he is still improving.
I have a problem with these GM's overvaluing 1st and 2nd round picks. They are willing to give up a 1st round pick that they have 3 years invested in but not one that they have not even used yet. It just makes no sense.
The point is that Grabner is not a rare commodity and the Canucks don't need him. How is that?
Rare enough that he'd potentially be our 3rd highestbgoal scorer, 2nd amongst wingers. Not sure what is so hard to understand. Would I undo the trade for him? No, I still value what Ballard brings more, but it's a joke to pretend that our top 6 is somehow too elite for him to crack when every game day thread had endless grousing about how bad Sammuelson or Torres or Raymond have been this season and we've got a fringe NHLer in Tambellini lining up in our top 6. Fact is, we could easily use Grabner right now and to pretend otherwise is just Canuck-coloured glasses. Or am I to presume that Raymond or Tambellini's supposedly better "two-way play" makes up for the fact that neither of them is providing much in the way of secondary scoring this season?
Thats what I'm saying. You won't give up a 1st rounder that you don't know but you will give up a 1st that you do know and one that has proven he can at least play at the NHL level.
There are lots of examples of 1st round picks that never even make it to the NHL just like there are lots of 5th, 6th and 7th rounders that tunr into gems.
I hope he has a good career, but it really isn't anything we should worry about.
Florida on the other hand...
The Canucks basically dumped him for nothing as well.
People were up in arms about moving him, but they failed to see how little value he had. He's a guy that couldn't make the regular roster on the majority of teams in the league, and can't be demoted without being sent through waivers. He was lucky to landed on the shallowest team in the league. But on the other hand, that's exactly how waivers are supposed to work.
He would have had a lot more value if a team had have been able to demote him safely and give him more time to get consistent in the AHL. But he was a marginal NHL player to start the season, and teams with legitimate playoff hopes are not going to keep a player like that on their roster if they think another player will help them win. Heck, even the Panthers, a team without much in the way of playoff hopes wasn't willing to do that.
At the end of the day, it isn't really much of a reflection of the player as much as it is the reality of how the CBA deals with young players now. If a player isn't a steady NHL regular at the end of his entry level contract, he's a "bust" as a draft pick. Not that there isn't a possibility that he'll turn out to be a good player down the road, but in order to get that value for a draft pick you need a player to develop quickly.
That's why Grabner's slow pace of development in the AHL was concerning. In order for a player to be considered a legitimate "skilled" forward with a shot at a top 6 on a decent NHL team, he needs to put up about a point per game in the AHL. He didn't get close to that level in his first season, and while looked good at times in his following seasons still wasn't quite there.
Thats what I'm saying. You won't give up a 1st rounder that you don't know but you will give up a 1st that you do know and one that has proven he can at least play at the NHL level.
There are lots of examples of 1st round picks that never even make it to the NHL just like there are lots of 5th, 6th and 7th rounders that tunr into gems.
If Grabner was doing this for the Panthers, the Ballard deal might not look as good, but since the Panthers put him on waivers and he got claimed the Isles, not so bad from the Nuck's POV.
But, looking back, the Canucks might have overpaid on the deal, based on how AV has been playing Ballard this season. Nucks probably should have gotten a pick back from the Panthers, say 3rd round?
As for Grabner, glad to see he is doing ok. He had tonnes of speed, but is still a streaky scorer. He needed a chance to just play and he's getting that now. Making the most of it. Time will tell whether he develops some consistency in his game.
He has hot and cold streaks. When he cools off, folks will forget about him.
What I liked most about him is that his acceleration really forces defenders back in a panic at times, which makes him a threat even if he doesn't convert.
If he just had a bit more hockey sense and saw the ice a bit better, he'd be a real star. That said, he's young and IMO will be a 30-15-45 guy in his prime.
I'm happy for him though, he always said the right things and looked like a good kid.
Rare enough that he'd potentially be our 3rd highestbgoal scorer....etc
He is a basically a sub 40 point guy on a glorified expansion team. Every bad NHL team has players that score a fair number of goals - someone has to score. Brian Bradley says hello.
He's a decent player, but sometimes you have to give up assets to get other assets. He's pretty good for goal scoring - not so good for everything else. Even with the hot streak he's been on lately, he's not a clear cut upgrade on anyone in our top 6.
I love watching Grabner play when he's confident an on his game as much as pretty much anyone. He's exciting and can be really flashy and fun to watch. And i'd still take him over Tambi given the chance. But that's in the past now. And when you look at how quickly our defensive depth disappeared, and how quickly it couldn't been even worse if Ehrhoff were out as well...Gillis clearly made the right move. To have a #5 d-man who can step into a game and play more than Shea Weber in a winning cause...is invaluable to a contender like the Canucks.
I would still do the trade over again if given the chance. However, I really wish Gillis could have found some way to keep Grabner. People can say all they want about how he wouldn't be producing the same way here in Vancouver but the fact remains, he's still got 15 goals playing for a ****** Islanders team. The Canucks may have the 3rd best offense in the league but, hello, before the Dallas game the they were in a scoring slump and people were complaining about the lack of secondary scoring. Grabner would have made this team just that much deeper.
Wish the Canucks could have kept him but, oh well. I'm not exactly unhappy with the trade-off either.
