Page 7 of 7

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:29 pm
by Topper
Potatoe1 wrote:
Zamboni Driver wrote:
A trade is also a gamble, if Ballard had been a top pairing stud then MG looks like a genius.
That is the point.

Ballard has been terrible. We gave up value.

Gillis had good intentions but he botched that move.

Not the end of the world but a very clear and obvious error on his part.
And we clearly won the trade. We have had a roster player playing 5/6/ D when healthy. The Panthers have a a prospect that does not seem to be developing well.

Did GMMG hope Ballard would be better, damn right, we all did, but we are still ahead of the Panthers on that deal, there fore the value we gave up was less than what we received.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:38 pm
by Potatoe1
Topper wrote: And we clearly won the trade. We have had a roster player playing 5/6/ D when healthy. The Panthers have a a prospect that does not seem to be developing well.

Did GMMG hope Ballard would be better, damn right, we all did, but we are still ahead of the Panthers on that deal, there fore the value we gave up was less than what we received.
:lol: that is bloody horrible logic.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:42 pm
by Hockey Widow
I don't think anyone doubts anymore that Ballard is not a fit here and he has not played up to expectations. The reasons are not relevant any longer. Whats done is done. I don't think it was a bad move on paper. The reality is a different story. But it really is time for MG to move him.

If Murray can get a return so too can Ballard. Even with a broken bone in his foot. He could a serviceable depth player for a contender. Problem is a lot of contenders will have cap concerns next year and probably don't want his term. He would be more of a trade value to us if he was FA at seasons end.

I do believe he can be traded for a pick. Not a first, maybe a 2nd. Or he can be traded for a prospect, not an A one. If he is a buy out candidate over the summer MG needs to try and move him for anything. As an owner I would be pretty pissed if I had to pay a buy out for the guy if I knew he didn't fit in the plans going forward and you made no attempt to move him.

AS for Booth I like his game. I don't like his lack of finish since he returned last season from his knee injury. But I like his game. I like watching him drive to the net. I like his speed and he can throw some nice hits along the board. His finish has been a let down, since his knee injury. I don't know what to expect from him. I think he is a top six. I guess I just question if he and MayRay are really both needed in the top 6, as opposed to giving 1-2 kids a chance to play full time next year.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 3:42 pm
by darren
RoyalDude wrote: Aquaman will just have to open up his wallet to save Mikey's bacon.
Are you in Aqualini's will, and disappointed because Booth and Ballard buyouts (if they happen) will make your inheritence smaller?

No?

Then why the ^(*&^#% do you care?

Booth has shown some promise (15g in 50 last year, not too shabby). He hasn't amounted to much this year due to injury, but we might have him back in the playoffs so you never know. Anyway, we gave up nothing to get him, so who cares?

Ballard has been servicable, if overpaid, depth this year. Oh well. We gave up a salary dump (Bernier), the first (which admittedly hurts), and Grabner. But Grabner is irrelevant because GRABNER WOULD NOT HAVE MADE THE TEAM AND WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST FOR NOTHING ON WAIVERS. That is a fact which is strongly supported by multiple lines of evidence. (Grabner's own comments, the fact that he couldn't make the shitty Florida Panthers either, etc).

Not sure why we're arguing this with you (again)... you fit Churchill's definition of a fanatic: a man who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:42 pm
by Zamboni Driver
Potatoe1 wrote:[

It's fairly clear the pro scouting was off on this player and that fall at the feet of the GM.
It's been off for all of the players that come from the SE. they've had good numbers feasting on crappy opposition, but not so easy out west

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:41 pm
by Blob Mckenzie
okcanuck wrote:
One Canadian team would have won the Cup if Buttman,who is supposedly in charge, had the balls to call out the refereeing. He clearly dropped the ball in that series.
I expect this shit at Bountiful............really ???? :crazy:

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:44 pm
by Blob Mckenzie
RoyalDude wrote:
GM's all have good intentions, Gillis is a good executive, he gets thumbs up in re-signing previous managements core players which that in itself is a tipping of the hat nod to the previous MGMT's job well done. But when it comes to bringing in 'his own players' outside of Tanev, Higgins, and signing Garrisona and Hamhius (Not Hard signing those two) the dude has made some real stinker moves.

His biggest mistake was slagging the previous management for making the cupboards bare when he was hired, yet his cupboards, after 5 years of drafting, are currently top 3 worst in the NHL. The GM community is a fraternity and those comments are why he put himself in the bad books with a lot of GM's around the league. The guy doesn't deserve the arrogance he possesses cause he truly is mere average as a GM. He is better suited to being a President like Lowe or something and give someone else control over the final say on player personnel. He just isn't cut out in the player evaluating department. He has a Player Agent heart and those guys always over value their clients/players (hence Roberto Luongo). His whole stubborn position on Luongo is very similar to how he was as an agent and how all agents are. Unfortunately for Gillis, he has to throw his cards down cause he has basically lost this round, but are we surprised? Tallon has rooked his Queen a couple times already. Proof is in the pudding.
I would say it's one of your worst posts but that would imply that you actually had good posts. Some posters here might not understand that you once didn't only troll the GM of your favorite team .












Oh sorry that was 1999. My mistake.



Carry on..................



wonders if Eye Bags tapped Michelle Dumaresq .

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:48 am
by RoyalDude
I thought that was one of my best. She-ite.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:10 am
by Topper
RoyalDude wrote:I thought that was one of my best. She-ite.
I admit, I thought Spud had written it.

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:21 pm
by okcanuck
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
okcanuck wrote:
One Canadian team would have won the Cup if Buttman,who is supposedly in charge, had the balls to call out the refereeing. He clearly dropped the ball in that series.
I expect this shit at Bountiful............really ???? :crazy:

So..... you thought the reffing was stellar in that series? If the referees would have called the series the same as in the regular season(and why would it be different?) the Nucks would have won handilly .

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:55 pm
by ukcanuck
I thinks it not so much the reffing, but the whining about two seasons later that is bountifullish

Re: GDT - Mar 23 Van @ LA 1:00 PST SNET

Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:55 pm
by Uncle dans leg
Bruins kicked our ass 4 out of 7 games. We snuck 3 back from them.
Time to move on.....