Page 2 of 3

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:10 am
by UK Canuck
we wil be able to judge this more around the xmas break i think. the season has barely started we still haven't settled as a complete team by then we should of and then we can judge but from what i have seen Krajicek is a very good d man and he is still learning.

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:36 am
by yammi
UK Canuck wrote:we wil be able to judge this more around the xmas break i think.
in terms of Krajicek, yes ... the kid's a great skater with a lot of potential

in terms of the post about each of Fitzpatrick, Bieksa, Bourdon et al. being better than Jovo, I don't think most people need until xmas to make that call

I'm not as down on Ed as some posters in this thread, and I think he's still at least a top 4 D on most teams including the Canucks

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:18 am
by UK Canuck
Tottaly agreed but this is a new era for the canucks out with the old in with the new.

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:27 am
by the_bad_fish
Jovo is a GREAT offenesive player but a very poor defensive player. I would take Salo over jovo any day. I think jovo should have converted back in to a forward.

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:40 am
by Nanaimo_Nuck
Jovanovski is overpaid, and a defensive liability... sure he can dazzle with big hits and score fancy goals but he just isnt what the Canucks need. They need defense... cuz DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS....

"uhhh no i want fancy goals and a defenseman who coughs it up and trips over his own feet tho! that should work really good cuz I'm stupid"

Some fans are stupid, I never liked jovanovski, I thought he was totally overrated and when he signed with phoenix i was so relieved.... think how many goals the canucks WONT let in this year

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:51 am
by Cookie La Rue
I guess the price-performance ratio is just too high, imo Jovo would be very welcome in our D if he would demand a reasonable salary...

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:54 am
by UK Canuck
Cookie La Rue wrote:I guess the price-performance ratio is just too high, imo Jovo would be very welcome in our D if he would demand a reasonable salary...



100% spot on.

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 6:32 am
by rikster
Watching some of the Flames/Coyotee game last night the thing that stood out for me with Jovo was his lack of effort....

I think there are few of us who will compete at the same level or harder after we sign the big contract as we did when we were in pursuit of the big contract...

Motivation, especially in a cap system is a very valuable commodity...

Take care...

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 6:57 am
by tantalum
rikster wrote:Watching some of the Flames/Coyotee game last night the thing that stood out for me with Jovo was his lack of effort....

I think there are few of us who will compete at the same level or harder after we sign the big contract as we did when we were in pursuit of the big contract...

Motivation, especially in a cap system is a very valuable commodity...

Take care...
Bang On. A big money 5 year deal. Money that is guaranteed to him. Hard to be motivated especially when the rest of the team isn't motivated either. It's a reason to be sure but it shouldn't be an excuse. Jovanovski's play outside of a couple of games has really been imore than disappointing. He should be leading that team by example. Well I guess he is leading by example just not in a good way.

All Jovanovski is doing is showing why he isn't worth $6.5 mil dollars a year. Of course, I think many of us were thinking he would demonstrate it in another way (ie. time on the IR, bad giveaways, lacklustere offensive output for an offensive minded D-man).

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:47 am
by Fred
I recall mentioning the fact that Jovo's best year, the year before last. Was when he played with Malik at that time the # 1 +/- in the NHL.

Pairs and the defensemen that played for years as a tandem is under rated IMO. Lummi and Muryzn was a very good example as was Robitai and Pratt. Ohlund and Sopel were a good tandem to.

It seems like that is no longer a concern but defensive tandem are more important than offensive line combo's IMO

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:53 am
by tantalum
Fred wrote:I recall mentioning the fact that Jovo's best year, the year before last. Was when he played with Malik at that time the # 1 +/- in the NHL.

Pairs and the defensemen that played for years as a tandem is under rated IMO. Lummi and Muryzn was a very good example as was Robitai and Pratt. Ohlund and Sopel were a good tandem to.

It seems like that is no longer a concern but defensive tandem are more important than offensive line combo's IMO
On the other hand if you are paying a guy $6.5 mil a year for 5 years you have to expect him to need that perfect partner. he should adjust. Or is this just another reason why Jovanovski at that price is just an insane contract?

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:12 am
by MarkMM
yammi wrote:
Cornuck wrote:Our defense is better off without him.
Gotta disagree ... the current contingent of D-men are not better than the group we would have with Jovo in the line-up.

You must be a huge huge Rory Fitzpatrick fan to argue that he makes the Canucks better than Jovo would.

Krajicek, Bieksa, Bourdon, and Fitzpatrick are doing ok so far ... but none of them is better than Jovo.
In a cap situation, you have to take everything into consideration...you just compared a guy making $500k to a guy making $6.5 million, that plays into his value as well, we'd need to give up both Ohlund and Mitchell in order to bring back Jovo and sign a guy at $500k to replace him. I'd take our current defense over that anyday.

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:11 pm
by Fred
you know i think I would ake this group over last year, Mitchell is not flashy but has a sense of purpose when he's out there. Ohlund seems to have settled down Salo is accpeting a larger role Bieska is more like the player we expected we were getting last season, Krajicek is a players that is hopefully on the upswing in his career and Fitzpatrick i think can play within the role he's been given. The biggest scare is I think is they have identified a weakness in Bourdon and it's going to take longer than any one thought to recify

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:43 pm
by yammi
MarkMM wrote:In a cap situation, you have to take everything into consideration...you just compared a guy making $500k to a guy making $6.5 million, that plays into his value as well, we'd need to give up both Ohlund and Mitchell in order to bring back Jovo and sign a guy at $500k to replace him. I'd take our current defense over that anyday.
Yes I realize that ... I'm simply reacting to a provocative post implying that the current defensive contingent is better than one with Jovo in the lineup ... but an argument can be made that, if money was not an issue, the Canuck D would be even stronger with Jovo than without him.

Some people think Jovo would weaken our current D, but I don't ... and I'm pretty sure that, if money was not an issue, and if Nonis was choosing who he would like in his lineup, he'd slot Jovo in and one of Bourdon or Fitzpatrick would be elsewhere.

That said, I'm glad that we spent money limited by the cap on the Sedin brothers and Luongo rather than Jovo.

Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:08 am
by UK Canuck
MarkMM wrote:
yammi wrote:
Cornuck wrote:Our defense is better off without him.
Gotta disagree ... the current contingent of D-men are not better than the group we would have with Jovo in the line-up.

You must be a huge huge Rory Fitzpatrick fan to argue that he makes the Canucks better than Jovo would.

Krajicek, Bieksa, Bourdon, and Fitzpatrick are doing ok so far ... but none of them is better than Jovo.
In a cap situation, you have to take everything into consideration...you just compared a guy making $500k to a guy making $6.5 million, that plays into his value as well, we'd need to give up both Ohlund and Mitchell in order to bring back Jovo and sign a guy at $500k to replace him. I'd take our current defense over that anyday.





we definitley do need to mess around with our D i think its playing really well.,