Shane Doan
Moderator: Referees
Re: Shane Doan
The energy MG & Co.put into trying to sign Doan points to two things ......they have identified the type of player the team needs to be succesful plus they are acknolwledging that they have a decreasing time period or window to win the Cup!
Are they frustrated, you betcha. Here's the problem currently. Having failed to get the type of player they believe they need they have shown their hand to the fans, owners, competition, every other GM in the league. How do they correct it. Had they signed Doan the trade route for Luongo would have maybe lent towards a propspect in return, now that Doans gone it's full steam ahead for a active player.
Huge difference between today and yesterday for GMGM
Are they frustrated, you betcha. Here's the problem currently. Having failed to get the type of player they believe they need they have shown their hand to the fans, owners, competition, every other GM in the league. How do they correct it. Had they signed Doan the trade route for Luongo would have maybe lent towards a propspect in return, now that Doans gone it's full steam ahead for a active player.
Huge difference between today and yesterday for GMGM
cheers
Re: Shane Doan
Or perhaps like every other team they identified Doan as a really good player and like every other team they wanted to add another really good player.Fred wrote:The energy MG & Co.put into trying to sign Doan points to two things ......they have identified the type of player the team needs to be succesful plus they are acknolwledging that they have a decreasing time period or window to win the Cup!
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 31126
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: Shane Doan
Yes just because they went after a quality veteran hockey player they have acknowledged to the world that the window is shrinking. Where do people come up with this shit ? He was a fucking UFA that could be had for money and money alone. No prospects, picks or players going the other way just cash. I for one am pissed he didn't sign here . The deal was apparently 4 years....20 million, no idea why people keep shouting about 6 - 7.5 million per season . Five million a year for Doan is a fair price and one I would have been fine with MG paying.Fred wrote:The energy MG & Co.put into trying to sign Doan points to two things ......they have identified the type of player the team needs to be succesful plus they are acknolwledging that they have a decreasing time period or window to win the Cup!
Are they frustrated, you betcha. Here's the problem currently. Having failed to get the type of player they believe they need they have shown their hand to the fans, owners, competition, every other GM in the league. How do they correct it. Had they signed Doan the trade route for Luongo would have maybe lent towards a propspect in return, now that Doans gone it's full steam ahead for a active player.
Fred their hand has been shown since March 8th, 2004. They need a big power forward to play in their top 6. You act as though the whole league just found this out yesterday.
As I said real nice summer MG. Kick your feet up during the lockout .
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Shane Doan
Bersnoozi said he had a "great" year, unless he was the second coming of Willie Mitchell (in his prime) defensively I just don't see 16-17-33 as great is all. I'm well aware stats don't tell the whole story...but they often give an indication somewhat. I'm also very curious to see how he fits in w/ the Canucks and how he does alongside Edler. Hopefully they can generate some chemistry.FAN wrote:As far as Garrison's assists totals, it's all relative. Garrison had 17 assists on one of the worst offensive teams in the league. Shea Weber had 30 assists last year. 3 Canucks defensemen had more assists than Weber. What does it prove? I'm not sure it even matters. Garrison didn't get a whole lot of assists on the PP, but he was clearly the triggerman whereas Campbell was the distributor. I would expect Garrison to improve on his assists totals if the Canucks remain a strong offensive team, but to expect him or require him to double his assists totals in order to be "great" is just unfair.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Re: Shane Doan
Well if Garrison is healthier than Salo and still provides that veteran leader like defense skill along with a lethal booming shot, I'll be happy.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
Re: Shane Doan
16 goals Is fine and I dont really think it would be hard to bump the assists by 10. Still not great.......but really good addition.
25 & 40....that's great.....as long as the defensive side is on track too
25 & 40....that's great.....as long as the defensive side is on track too
Silence intelligence so stupid isn’t offended….
Re: Shane Doan
I haven't seen Garrison play period. But the similarity to Aucoin does have some merit. Aucoin had one good year when he put up points and he credited that to Messier. He said evey time he got a pass it was flat and in the right position for a one timer. Who knows how much credit for Garrison goes to Campbell, but I'm betting it didn't hurt. Time will tell
cheers
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 31126
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: Shane Doan
If Garrison is an Aucoin clone I am a-ok with that. Aucoin has been a very good pro.RoyalDude wrote:I see Garrison as another Adrien Aucoin. Anybody else on board with me with that comparison?
Back to Doan. Damn glad the old man hit pay dirt somewhere else. The old man experiment doesn't work here, see Sundin, and Messier.
Mats Sundin, had he played the whole season here would have had a very good season. Down the stretch and in the playoffs he was one of the teams best players. It took him awhile to get going and to get into game shape.
Mark Messier didn't play very well here at all but the team around him was garbage. There have been a few older players that have signed here and done ok. Samuelsson comes to mind, Murray Baron had some solid years here.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- coco_canuck
- CC 1st Team All-Star
- Posts: 966
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm
Re: Shane Doan
The Sundin criticism really makes zero sense.Blob Mckenzie wrote: Mats Sundin, had he played the whole season here would have had a very good season. Down the stretch and in the playoffs he was one of the teams best players. It took him awhile to get going and to get into game shape.
Gillis signed a veteran free-agent to a big 1 year deal when the team had loads of cap space.
Did Sundin screw up the Canucks cap situation and their ability to make other additions?
No, the Canucks actually had enough cap space to make significant trade-deadline additions, but no trade was made.
Did Sundin leave a negative effect on the team, or did he cause a rift in the locker room?
No, the Sedins, and especially Kesler, credit Sundin for helping them elevate their games to another level. Sundin got in Kesler's ear, got him to use his shot more and convinced him to play with more offensive confidence. The Sedins credit Sundin for showing them how a superstar deals with expectations and how to stick to playing your own game regardless of what's happening.
Did Sundin perform poorly in the playoffs?
No, unless you think 8 points, including 3 goals, in 8 playoff games is poor production.
The only thing anyone can criticize Sundin for is only scoring 28 points in 41 games...after sitting out half the year. Like Blob-Cat just said, Sundin rounded into form at the end of the regular season and the playoffs.
If someone can enlighten me as to what the big issue with Sundin was, I'm all ears. Oh, and don't give me the shit about the 2 year offer. Sundin was only going to sign a 1 year deal, and Gillis made the 2 year offer to put the Canucks on the map with big-time free agents, and to scare off other teams. Last time I checked, it was a calculated gamble that paid off, so what is the problem here?
- ClamRussel
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: New South Wales, Australia
Re: Shane Doan
My only problem w/ Sundin was he didn't make up his mind before training camp, at that age it was obvious he was in for a slow start. I would have been fine if he had signed here for another 2yrs to be quite honest. I thought he was solid down the stretch and in the playoffs.
"Once a King, always a King" -Mike Murphy
Re: Shane Doan
As I mentioned in the Schultz thread many months ago now, I've met Schultz's cousin a few times and she was super surprised that he didn't sign here.Boston Canucker wrote:How did they blow it? By that I mean was there something they should have done that they didn't do to obtain him?wienerdog wrote:Mr.Miyagi wrote: ....
This one was beyond Gillis' control, IMO. I'm more pissed about Schultz. They totally blew that one.
Word on the street is that GMMG went the soft-sell route, letting the "vaunted" position of the Nucks speak for itself.
That's fine, but the hard-sell of the Oil was evidently more impressive to a young kid like Schultz.
IMO, we really really really could've used an asset like him here - and I know it's not his style, but I do wish Gillis sold him harder and that we landed a kid that - according to his cousin - wanted to play here from the moment he started playing hockey.
If that's not a HUGE fucking advantage in landing a player, I don't what is.
I'll bet even mgmt wants a re-do on that one.
Re: Shane Doan
On Schultz I agree.wienerdog wrote: I'll bet even mgmt wants a re-do on that one.
Oil promised him the sun, moon + stars and put on the best dog and pony show they could.
It was an old school. low brow sales pitch and probably the only style that the Oilers brass is capable of running.
It worked on the 20 year old Schults but the Oil have failed miserably landing more matture free agents.
I think Gillis played it the right way with Doan, I just think the deck was stacked against him given Doan was desperate to stay in Pheonix.
Re: Shane Doan
Yes, 100% agreed on both fronts.Potatoe1 wrote:On Schultz I agree.wienerdog wrote: I'll bet even mgmt wants a re-do on that one.
Oil promised him the sun, moon + stars and put on the best dog and pony show they could.
It was an old school. low brow sales pitch and probably the only style that the Oilers brass is capable of running.
It worked on the 20 year old Schults but the Oil have failed miserably landing more matture free agents.
I think Gillis played it the right way with Doan, I just think the deck was stacked against him given Doan was desperate to stay in Pheonix.
- Chef Boi RD
- MVP
- Posts: 28953
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
- Location: Vancouver
Re: Shane Doan
And a smart GM would have realized this which begs me to ask, why did Gillis waste his fucking time and effort when most every other GM out there new he was going to re-sign where his heart lays which is in Phoenix. Was it because Gillis went too casual on the Schultz bid? Such arrogance thinking that Schultz was an easy signing. Pie in the face that was, losing a bidding war to the lowly Oilers. Was he trying to make up for that gaff? Go aggressive on Doan? I don't think so.Potatoe1 wrote:, I just think the deck was stacked against him given Doan was desperate to stay in Pheonix.
Gillis is an idiot. Plain and simple.
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
Re: Shane Doan
What would have been a better use of his time ?RoyalDude wrote: And a smart GM would have realized this which begs me to ask, why did Gillis waste his fucking time
Not a whole lot going on these days....