Detroit eyeing Lindgren.

Did anyone else catch the article (paragraph?) in the Detroit Free Press about the Red Wings and their 'center' problem???

The writer, whose name escapes me, said in one line that the Wings would be "scanning the waiver wire" looking for a 3rd or 4th line center and suggested that with "the Canucks plethora of centermen" and "their difficulties in protecting them all" Lindgren may be available and Holland would be willing to snap him up.

Couple of points:

1) Canucks, IMO, do not have a plethora of centermen but I suppose if we do sign Keane we would have to either expose him or Lindgren or maybe both???

2) I don't know if Holland has expressed this publically or this is just the well-imagined desires of this particular sports writer.

3) I went back to their web-site but couldn't locate the article. It was a few days ago.

Thanks.

Since Keane was available all summer, exposing him to the draft wouldn't be a risk.

It is very simple....Slegr and May must be exposed. If May is taken we sign Keane, if Slegr is taken we have more money for another forward.

Arvedson should probably be protected. Lindgren should be next in line after Langdon, Keane if signed, May, and Slegr.

Langdon should be exposed ahead of May, Lindgren etc. Burke has stated that Martin Grenier can and will play in some NHL games this year and he is more than capable of filling in for Langdon's role. Langdon will be exposed ahead of a lot of the Canucks regular players.

It is very simple....Slegr and May must be exposed. If May is taken we sign Keane, if Slegr is taken we have more money for another forward.

Arvedson should probably be protected. Lindgren should be next in line after Langdon, Keane if signed, May, and Slegr.
The problem with leaving May unprotected is if he is taken who is our enforcer. We can't dress Langdon every night.

Arvedson will be protected

Slegr and Langdon should not be protected. Lindgren and May should be.

I hightly doubt anybody will take Langdon, every team has a young prospect that can fight. Slegr will probably be taken, but I think we can do without him. He is a decent player, but I think 800K is too much.

And Keane should not be protected either.

I doubt Holland wants Lindgren. He doesn't address the center need the wings' have. They need somebody who is about 6'2" and gritty. A dave Scatchard/Jeff Halpern type. Not Lindgren.

I doubt Holland wants Lindgren. He doesn't address the center need the wings' have. They need somebody who is about 6'2" and gritty. A dave Scatchard/Jeff Halpern type. Not Lindgren.

Yeah I think we were referring to the waiver wire :rolleyes:

Every team could use Dave Scatchard and a lot would like Halpern.

Slegr and Langdon should not be protected. Lindgren and May should be.

I hightly doubt anybody will take Langdon, every team has a young prospect that can fight. Slegr will probably be taken, but I think we can do without him. He is a decent player, but I think 800K is too much.

And Keane should not be protected either.


If Slegr is taken who would we get to replace him? I don't think we can expect any of our prospects to replace him at this point.

I doubt Holland wants Lindgren. He doesn't address the center need the wings' have. They need somebody who is about 6'2" and gritty. A dave Scatchard/Jeff Halpern type. Not Lindgren.

Lindgren is 6'3 and a great defensive forward, why wouldnt the Wings want him?

Slegr and Langdon should not be protected. Lindgren and May should be.

I hightly doubt anybody will take Langdon, every team has a young prospect that can fight. Slegr will probably be taken, but I think we can do without him. He is a decent player, but I think 800K is too much.

And Keane should not be protected either.

I highly doubt Slegr will be left exposed for these reasons: there are other teams that wanted him this summer, his contract is very affordable, many teams are looking for defensive depth.

May won't be exposed because Burke crowed all summer that the May signing was a big signing for the Canucks.

Langdon will be exposed. No doubt there.
Baumgartner will be exposed.
Eakins will be exposed.
Moss will be exposed.
Keane should be exposed even if they sign him.

The question is, what is our waiver problems going into the start of the season? Does Mogzis have to be protected? If so you can bet that the Canucks will protect one less foward rat her than lose him on defence. And that guy would probably be Lindgren.

It is very simple....Slegr and May must be exposed. If May is taken we sign Keane, if Slegr is taken we have more money for another forward.

Arvedson should probably be protected. Lindgren should be next in line after Langdon, Keane if signed, May, and Slegr.

Why does May have to be exposed ??

Why does May have to be exposed ??
Pardon? Do you mean why is he the best choice or why would he need to be? I am not getting your question. I would choose to expose hiim because I do no think he will be selected by another team and if he is....so what. Big contract for a fourth liner. I am sure he, Lindgren, Langdon, and Baumer will all be available...I personally would add Slegr to that list.

EDIT: Sorry I just re-read my original post....did not mean it that way. I meant to say that I would choose to expose them.

It is very simple....Slegr and May must be exposed. If May is taken we sign Keane, if Slegr is taken we have more money for another forward.

Arvedson should probably be protected. Lindgren should be next in line after Langdon, Keane if signed, May, and Slegr.

Langdon is the absolute last player that should be protected. No one needs to pick an enforcer off waivers and give up one of their own players to take him. He'll barely suit up for 30 games for the Canucks. And you want to expose May and Slegr before him?

The anti-May attitude is puzzling. What we need is a guy who can skate, hit, and forecheck along with the odd fight. May's perfect for this role, and obviously is not expected to put up points, but can be solid defensively and receive some pk time. What use is Langdon (when dressed) if all he can do is drop the gloves. I didn't realize this was the WHA circa mid 70's here. May was hurt in the playoffs apparently, if his dismal performance is swaying the opinions on the guy. Also, the "May is a poor replacement for Klatt" comments are completely irrelevant. Arvedson is our replacement for Klatt. May is the answer to this so-called "grit" issue everyone complains about. Keep in mind May barely played any games for the Canucks last year where he was 100% healthy. Give the guy a chance. Keane based on his performance on a thin 4th line in Denver last season is not an upgrade. I'd like Keane signed as well, but only as the 13th forward.

Langdon is the absolute last player that should be protected. No one needs to pick an enforcer off waivers and give up one of their own players to take him. He'll barely suit up for 30 games for the Canucks. And you want to expose May and Slegr before him?

The anti-May attitude is puzzling. What we need is a guy who can skate, hit, and forecheck along with the odd fight. May's perfect for this role, and obviously is not expected to put up points, but can be solid defensively and receive some pk time. What use is Langdon (when dressed) if all he can do is drop the gloves. I didn't realize this was the WHA circa mid 70's here. May was hurt in the playoffs apparently, if his dismal performance is swaying the opinions on the guy. Also, the "May is a poor replacement for Klatt" comments are completely irrelevant. Arvedson is our replacement for Klatt. May is the answer to this so-called "grit" issue everyone complains about. Keep in mind May barely played any games for the Canucks last year where he was 100% healthy. Give the guy a chance. Keane based on his performance on a thin 4th line in Denver last season is not an upgrade. I'd like Keane signed as well, but only as the 13th forward.

What I meant by that list of players is that I would expose Langdon, then Lindgren, Slegr, May, Baumer etc. in that order. I was not very clear in my post. Langdon is #1 exposure material.

What I meant by that list of players is that I would expose Langdon, then Lindgren, Slegr, May, Baumer etc. in that order. I was not very clear in my post. Langdon is #1 exposure material.

Then how come you said that May and Slegr must be exposed? :confused:

Agree with mecca. Doubt Langdon gets picked up and Lindgren's health concerns make him doubtful as well. They should get through. We know that Slegr won't and it's almost assured May won't. Our best gamble is Lindgren and May. Play of Kesler suggests he may be a decent replacement for Lindgren.

Also you have to recognize someone has to be dropped if some one picked up off waivers. Detroit will have to expose someone if they pick up Lindgren. Doubtful they can without losing someone equal to Lindgren.

Expose Langdon, Baumgartner, Keane(if signed), Moss...

Everyone who they don't protect, unless they have some type of exception, is automatically exposed.

Expose Langdon, Baumgartner, Keane(if signed), Moss...

Agreed on your list. No way Slegr is exposed before Baumgartner, and I doubt they expose either May or Lindgren so they can keep Langdon instead.

Better to sign Keane before the waiver draft if they intend too (I hope they don't though) because if they wait until after they would have to expose someone from their 25 man roster to make room for Keane. If they want him bad enough he will make it through waivers easier at the waiver draft than if they sign him (he has already stated he doesn't want to go to the minors) and have to expose a younger player to clear a roster spot.

Bottom line, don't sign Keane. We have younger, better players to fill the same role. If we are hurting that bad in the leadership dept we have bigger issues than signing Mike Keane.

I have a feeling Langdon will be protected.

If Keane makes the team Ruutu will be exposed.. and if he's picked up by another team then no big deal we have someone who can replace him as the 13th forward.

Ruutu is expendable.. we have the youth to replace him.. and if Keane is signed it's because he's still got some play in him. He won't spend the entire season on the bench.

May and Slegr should be exposed.

Langdon, if exposed, will probably find a taker. Decent enforcer, cheap contract, good character.

May and Slegr just signed UFA deals...if anybody else had wanted them, they would have inquired over the summer.

Besides, May is useless, and him leaving opens up a spot for a youngster. Veteran help is good, up to a point.

This has been adressed in several other threads...
Players to be exposed:

Tyler Moss
Mats Lindgren
Darren Langdon
Tyler Bouck
Pat Kavanaugh
Ryan Ready
Zenith Komarniski
Nolan Baumgartner
Johan Davidsson
Dallas Eakins
Chris Neilsen
Jaroslav Obsut
Justin Morrison?
Martin Grenier?
Mike Keane (if signed)

Really the only player there I can see being taken is Tyler Bouck. Maybe Grenier if he is eligible. Even then I highly doubt it. Waivers are pretty much a non-issue.

How many threads is that now, discussing which players will be exposed in the waiver draft??

No way is the team going to protect Langdon over Ruutu or May or Slegr!!

we will likely protect 11 forwards and 7 dmen... so that would leave Lindgren (and Bouck) available, with May and Ruutu protected... if they decide not to protect Slegr (I don't see it though) then Lindgren gets protected.

This team is trying to contend... you don't leave Ruutu unprotected thinking that Bouck will step up... and you don't risk losing a guy like May either, when you're trying to contend for the Cup.

How many threads is that now, discussing which players will be exposed in the waiver draft??

No way is the team going to protect Langdon over Ruutu or May or Slegr!!

we will likely protect 11 forwards and 7 dmen... so that would leave Lindgren (and Bouck) available, with May and Ruutu protected... if they decide not to protect Slegr (I don't see it though) then Lindgren gets protected.

This team is trying to contend... you don't leave Ruutu unprotected thinking that Bouck will step up... and you don't risk losing a guy like May either, when you're trying to contend for the Cup.

Cool, now I don't have to make a long drawn out post. The Canucks are trying to win and will keep the players that will help do that now and in the playoffs. Something that May, Ruutu and Slegr are here to do. Lindgren too but he has been oft-injured which makes him more exposible.

Thanks NITO for being a voice of reason.

May and Slegr should be exposed.

Langdon, if exposed, will probably find a taker. Decent enforcer, cheap contract, good character.

May and Slegr just signed UFA deals...if anybody else had wanted them, they would have inquired over the summer.

May and Slegr both had other teams interested in their services but both decided to sign with the Nucks. The 'Yotes and Sens were very intrerested in May, and IIRC, Phoenix actually offered him more money. May would definitely be picked up if exposed.


Besides, May is useless, and him leaving opens up a spot for a youngster. Veteran help is good, up to a point.

I wouldn't say he's useless. He's tough, big, decent defensively, experienced, leader, seems to be well liked, and he allows the Canucks to play him instead of Langdon, always a plus. On top of that he can chip in some goals, around 10 or so which is a lot more than what Langdon was doing in the same spot. The Canucks wouldn't have signed him if they didn't see him the plans for this year. If the Canucks have a young player who can do all of the above, than give him the spot, but I'm not sure they do.

Slegr apparently had several offers but chose Vancouver because of the connection with his Dad. If he goes on waivers he is gone.

IMO, Slegr wont be exposed as many have stated that there are a few other teams who would want defensive depth and who wanted to sign him. IF the canucks lose him in this draft, then we might be 2 pieces away rather than one, and yes, I do value Slegr quite high as I believe he is more of an upgrade from Baron. Of course, I'd have to wait and see how he plays for the nucks and decide, but as it stands, Slegr is good to keep.

Langdon should be exposed before May/Lingren, as good as he is as a guy who never complains about playing time and tries hard, May undoubtfully has much better scoring potential.


Man, i still remember a few years ago, on the front page of sports section " MAY DAY MAY DAY", who scored a couple goals agasint "xxx" ( I 4got who they played)

Nolan Baumgartner, D; Johan Davidsson, F; Chris Neilson, F; Dallas Eakins, D; Tyler Bouck, F; Pat Kavanagh, F; Zenith Komarniski, D; Jaroslav Obsut, D; Ryan Ready, F; Vadim Sharifijanov, F; Herbert Vasiljevs, F; Tyler Moss, G. will be unprotected because the canucks will not unprotect players they just signed(slegr, may, arvedson) or players that have some value like Langdon and Lindgren. You idiots.

All those players are canucks property and are expendable.

Nolan Baumgartner, D; Johan Davidsson, F; Chris Neilson, F; Dallas Eakins, D; Tyler Bouck, F; Pat Kavanagh, F; Zenith Komarniski, D; Jaroslav Obsut, D; Ryan Ready, F; Vadim Sharifijanov, F; Herbert Vasiljevs, F; Tyler Moss, G. will be unprotected because the canucks will not unprotect players they just signed(slegr, may, arvedson) or players that have some value like Langdon and Lindgren. You idiots.

All those players are canucks property and are expendable.

Care to tell us then how the Canucks will protect:
Cloutier
Hedberg
Naslund
Bertuzzi
Morrison
Sedin
Sedin
Arvedsson
Cooke
Chubarov
Linden
May
Ruutu
Jovanovski
Ohlund
Allen
Sopel
Salo
Malik
Slegr
(2 goalies, 18 skaters)
PLUS Lindgren and Langdon?

Pray tell us "idiots" how you would protect them.

(2 goalies, 18 skaters)
PLUS Lindgren and Langdon?



Good problem to have when Lindgren doesn't fit into the top 18 skaters. Great depth! It would be a shame to lose him.

There is a reason Mats Lindgren signed a low, one year deal with us-he has injury problems, and will only play for the Canucks at this point. Given his injury history, I cannot see anyone claiming him. Not at the expense of a roster player...

Well then gentlemen, the canucks will then have to unprotect Langdon and May because they have the least value.

Well then idiots, the canucks will then have to unprotect Langdon and May because they have the least value.
:rolleyes:

Brad May will get snapped up on waivers. Who would claim Lindgren? Honestly...

:rolleyes:

Brad May will get snapped up on waivers. Who would claim Lindgren? Honestly...

Add to that, would Burke leave May unprotected after he signed him THIS offseason?

Honestly now who has more value May or Lindgren? Its a no-brainer. Lindgren Plays way more and contributes way more than May could ever dream of. If We lose May big deal we have Langdon, Grenier, Ruutu, Allen, Cooke.

Lindgren is responsible while May is a liability

Honestly now who has more value May or Lindgren? Its a no-brainer. Lindgren Plays way more and contributes way more than May could ever dream of. If We lose May big deal we have Langdon, Grenier, Ruutu, Allen, Cooke.

Lindgren is responsible while May is a liability

Lindgren also generated zero interest in the free agent market. May had offers from other teams, in multi-year deals. Lindgren has already said he is only interested in playing in Vancouver, given that fact and his injuries, no one will take him. May was just signed by Burke, to a 2 year deal and brings toughness to the 4th line. Burke will NOT risk losing him on waivers.

Honestly now who has more value May or Lindgren? Its a no-brainer. Lindgren Plays way more and contributes way more than May could ever dream of. If We lose May big deal we have Langdon, Grenier, Ruutu, Allen, Cooke.

Lindgren is responsible while May is a liability

Lindgren happens to play in the lone spot that I wouldn't mind seeing a rookie play. Kesler and to a lesser extent Smith can play that spot between May and Ruutu/Keane or it moves Chubarov down to that line and Reid and to a lesser extent can play between Cooke and Linden.

Honestly, I value May more because he brings the toughness that Cooke doesn't provide, the experience that Grenier doesn't have, can play a regular shift that Langdon can't, plays the left wing apposed to right as Ruutu does and it is yet to be seen if Allen can crack the top six defensemen. May's brand on toughness would be sorely lacking from this team if he was let go, I'm not even a fan of his, but I do realize the role that he needs to fill.

Lindgren is great on the PK and very responsible defensively but didn't the Canucks just sign a perennial Selkie nominee in Magnus Arvedsson? His defensive loss would be more that covered. Myself, am I bigger Lindgren fan than May but I'm more of a fan of the Canucks winning, which May will help more than Lindgren IMO.

May's energy also has a big effect on the rest of the team. The guy just makes other players play harder. Without May in the line-up they would likely have to play Langdon a lot more which would be a significant downgrade.
No doubt Lindgren is the more skilled player but I agree with most of the fodder on this thread about May being lost for sure in the waiver draft while Lindgren would slide through.

Just curious how many of those folks who think we should expose May to the waiver draft also think we should sign Keane for his leadership?

Also, take a listen in the archives at canucks.com, and in particular #3 where he talks about other opportunities to explore. There were other teams out there looking at him, but he wanted to stay in Vancouver.

http://www.canucks.com/theinsider/default.asp?sectionID=5&id=803

One last thing. Here is a comment from Ray Ferraro about our team. I found this in the game recap from last night on canucks.com.

"If there is a concern (with Vancouver) it is grit. But that is an easy thing to get. It is much easier to get a tough guy than to get a 100 point guy."

I happen to agree with him, and you don't go exposing a guy that brings something to this team that no one else on the roster does. A guy willing to drop the mittens and stick up for this teammates that can actually skate and play a regular shift while chipping in the odd goal. May is a very useful player and there is no chance he gets left off the protected list.

Lindgren is a different matter, and if he gets picked up there are guys to fill his role. We could shift Linden back to center (not the best option, IMO, but it is an option), or keep Reid or Kesler up. Having said all that, I doubt he gets picked because of his injury history and his stated desire to play only in Vancouver.

Exposing Lindgren is a smart, calculated risk. Exposing May is just plain stupid.

Exposing Lindgren is a smart, calculated risk. Exposing May is just plain stupid.

A voice of simplicity and reason. :bow:


Next thing you'll hear on this thread is that if we lose May then we can just sign Gino!!

I think the reason that Lindgren won't get picked up by Detroit is that they'd have to unprotect one of their other players to pick him up. He's a big center who is good on face offs, but he's not good for much else. He's never going to be a scoring threat and as some stated here, he's been somewhat injury prone in the past.

The wings' need a center who can get 45 points plus per season. 4th liners who can get 15-20 points are a dime a dozen.

Now if May were exposed, I could see Detroit nabbing him in a second...

I still think many Canuck fans are over estimating who we could lose in the waiver draft & just who Burke will protect. My list right now would be:

1G - Cloutier
2G - Hedberg

1S - Naslund
2S - Bertuzzi
3S - Morrison
4S - D Sedin
5S - H Sedin
6S - Arvedsson
7S - Cooke
8S - Chubarov
9S - Linden
10S - May
11S - Jovanovski
12S - Ohlund
13S - Allen
14S - Sopel
15S - Salo
16S - Malik
17S - Langdon or Lindgren (Slegr or Bouck if Burke feels either would be taken)
18S - Davidsson

I think Brian Burke wants to establish a flexability to bring up players from the Moose this year that the Canucks didn't have last year. To do that, Brian will have to protect some players that he feels could be exposed during the regular season that would not be picked up on waivers or would not hurt the team if they were. To me those players are a choice between Langdon, Lindgren or no names like Davidsson. This will mean players like Slegr or Ruutu will have to be exposed in the draft. Though those two are important to the club, they are replaceable by players already in our system if they are picked up.

Slegr is either our #6 or #7 D. If a #6, his role can be replaced by Allen. If a #7 he can be replaced by Baumgartner or Jokela now & maybe Mojzis, Koltsev or Vydareny later in the season. Personally I think he would pass waivers & thus allow us to move him back & forth between Vancouver & Winnipeg for conditioning or allow a prospect up for a game or two.

Ruutu has earned a right to make the team, but he is not the only Canuck to bring his style of aggitating, mucking defensive play. In fact he is near the bottom in our depth chart in that role behind Cooke & May & currently being strongly challenged by Keane & Bouck.

Slegr & Ruutu are the types of players who may be able to slip through the waiver draft, but likely would not slip by if they had to clear waivers during the regular season, especially when teams start experiencing injuries so getting them to clear waivers now is less of a risk of the possiblity of losing them.

The alternative to exposing Ruutu, is to trade him prior to the draft. Of the roster players on the team, Lindgren & Ruutu, IMO, are the most expendable and that would get the Canucks at least a early or mid round pick. Players like Cooke or Sopel would get us more, but I don't see Brian making a major trade right now & that is the only reason the Canucks would consider trading Cooke or Sopel.

Remember: Cooke is good, dont trade him. Sopel is good, don't trade him. :p

PS: Mole ii. I don't appreciate being called an idiot, even in jest & I am sure most other posters don't either. In type, it is hard to know if you are serious, joking or just not thinking. Such comments, if serious, are an indication of immaturity. The majority of Canuck HF posters are adults or at least act like adults. Please limit your name calling.

PS: Mole ii. I don't appreciate being called an idiot, even in jest & I am sure most other posters don't either. In type, it is hard to know if you are serious, joking or just not thinking. Such comments, if serious, are an indication of immaturity. The majority of Canuck HF posters are adults or at least act like adults. Please limit your name calling.

I second that. I've got enough to deal with.. please keep the insults to an absolute minimum. I'm sure it seems funny to call someone an idiot over the internet, but save it for chat rooms or MSN conversations.

I disagree with Lindgren/Ruutu being fully replaceable.

True that we have depth at those 4th liners, but Lindgren provides hella good 4th line center role and is a good PK/faceoff guy, with experience too. Ruutu, I just likes the kid and he has worked very hard to be where he is now.. I still remember many wanted to trade him last year and talking about no spot for Ruutu last year and blah blah blah.. the kid has earned his time with the nucks late last year, I'd say protect him

true that Slegr is a #6/7 D man, but he is a #6/7 D depth that brings experience and some leadership, which both Allen or Jokela or Mojzis doesnt bring. At this time of the year, last year before CBA, window of winning it all is getting smaller.

I do expect to lose maybe 1 or 2 at the waiver draft.. but thats the same for any deep teams in the NHL..

hi-wayman i really cant agree with you...

exposing Slegr/Ruutu-they will be gone, no doubt about it

exposing lindgren/langdon-BOTH slid through waivers last season...

Davidsson? Protecting him would be an option if we had players who were exempt-but we don't. We cannot afford to lose a roster player in the waiver draft. If we like a player that much-expose Jiri Slegr at that point, but don't expose him to begin with.

Hiwayman - the Canucks have left people on the protected roster like Rohlin in the past so they had someone to drop if they picked some up someone from another team. They are not in that position now. Also with a 23 man roster you can call people up without having to waive anyone. Last year Ruutu was kept around and people were still called up. He didn't have to be waived.

IMO all you are doing is losing someone like Slegr for nothing. You're saying we will protect Davidson to provide flexibility when the 23 man roster already gives you enough flexibility. Also if we really need that flexibility then you can make a two for one trade and open more roster room that way. (for example trade Ruutu and Slegr - at least you get something)

In the end what you are suggesting is acquire unneeded flexibility at the cost of our 6th defenseman. That doesn't make sense. Moreover you are suggesting retaining someone like Davidson to have the ability to pick someone up when clearly the Canucks will not take anyone off the waiver list. If that is not the reason for including Davidsson on the protected list then I'm totally baffled.

Look, Waveburner, has laid out a best path in which people like Lindgren and Langdon are left are protected list. They are the least likely to be taken and the least harmful to lose. Your suggestion hurts the team by causing us to lose players and really get nothing back (accept unneeded flexibility).

The only place where you may make some sense is suggesting, in a round about way, that Ruutu go before Lindgren. If all things were equal I would agree. However the state of Lindgren's health makes this very questionable.

I second that. I've got enough to deal with.. please keep the insults to an absolute minimum. I'm sure it seems funny to call someone an idiot over the internet, but save it for chat rooms or MSN conversations.

Gee im sorry guys...i didnt realize you guys were/are so uptight. No hard feelings? :)

We'd probably expose Keane. I really don't see him getting taken either as he was a training camp walk on. But I really like Keane. He's gritty and experienced. How many Cups has he won? I think it's something like three or four. That's something we need. A guy with playoff experience and who knows how to win. He's a leader who's good at killing penalties too. I'm starting to sound a bit like a broken record on Keane I'm sure, but I really do consider him a valuable player and hope we keep him.

If Lindgren was exposed, I'd see Detroit maybe looking at picking him up as they do have a center spot available on the third or fourth line (depending on where Draper plays). Lindgren would be a serviceable player in that role and could help them. But maybe they want Hudler to play at the NHL level already, I really don't know.

I'd hate to see Lindgren in Wings uniform.. that would really suck..

:(

I'd hate to see Lindgren in Wings uniform.. that would really suck..

:(


Yeah, skill guys are so much harder to replace than grinders. If i were GM i would chuck May and Langdon out there. We lost Mike Brown to waivers and were fine or even better off without him.

Yeah, skill guys are so much harder to replace than grinders. If i were GM i would chuck May and Langdon out there. We lost Mike Brown to waivers and were fine or even better off without him.

If you are comparing Mike Brown to Brad May then I am glad you aren't GM. May is not a no skill goon. He can actually play this game. Hopefully, once the season starts, you will realize that.

Detroit is not picking up Lindgren. They have protection problems of their own. If they do then thry'll have to drop someone like Devereaux.

These waiver drafts are not done in a void. The other team has to watch their list too. If Lindgren goes anywhere it will be to someone like Columbus who don't have too much too protect.

Hiwayman - the Canucks have left people on the protected roster like Rohlin in the past so they had someone to drop if they picked some up someone from another team. They are not in that position now. Also with a 23 man roster you can call people up without having to waive anyone. Last year Ruutu was kept around and people were still called up. He didn't have to be waived.

IMO all you are doing is losing someone like Slegr for nothing. You're saying we will protect Davidson to provide flexibility when the 23 man roster already gives you enough flexibility. Also if we really need that flexibility then you can make a two for one trade and open more roster room that way. (for example trade Ruutu and Slegr - at least you get something)

In the end what you are suggesting is acquire unneeded flexibility at the cost of our 6th defenseman. That doesn't make sense. Moreover you are suggesting retaining someone like Davidson to have the ability to pick someone up when clearly the Canucks will not take anyone off the waiver list. If that is not the reason for including Davidsson on the protected list then I'm totally baffled.

Look, Waveburner, has laid out a best path in which people like Lindgren and Langdon are left are protected list. They are the least likely to be taken and the least harmful to lose. Your suggestion hurts the team by causing us to lose players and really get nothing back (accept unneeded flexibility).

The only place where you may make some sense is suggesting, in a round about way, that Ruutu go before Lindgren. If all things were equal I would agree. However the state of Lindgren's health makes this very questionable.
No Orcatown, though players like Rohlin were protected in order to drop should the team want to take another team's exposed player, my suggestion that Ruutu or Slegr be among those not protected for the draft is more about the different rules for team make up & player exemption from waivers between the waiver draft and the regular season.

If the team is to make a more serious run in the playoffs this year, it is even more important that the Canucks have the flexibility to bring up & test some of their better prospects who will be playing on the Moose this year. I'm talking about players like Kavanagh, Bouck, Jokela, Ready, Komarniski & others being able to play up to 10 games on the Canucks during the regular season so that the Canucks will know if they can rely on them should they need them at the end of the season & in the playoffs. If we can slip a regular player though waivers, it is far, far easier to do during the wiaver draft than during the regular season. Personally I think Ruutu or Slegr would not be picked up on waivers during the waiver draft, but they would certainly be picked up if exposed during the regular season. Also you can't say the Canucks won't be interested in some of the other team's exposed players depending on who they have to drop off their list to make room. It's unlikely, but still possible.

Duing the waiver draft, a team can only protect 18 skaters & 2 goalies. If a player is taken that team must drop one of their own protected skaters. The team that looses the player on waivers has the right to take the player the other team dropped as compensation should they wish (dropping another player off their list). During the regular season, on the other hand, a team can protect 23 players and only has to make sure that limit is kept should the team pick a player up through waivers. In other words the team can make room for the new player by sending a waiver exempt player to their farm team without actually having to necessarily expose one of their players to other teams like what is required in the waiver draft. Where a team may have passed on taking a player on waivers during the draft because they could lose one of their own players, during the regular season they don't have as much of a proiblem and so are more likely to take a chance on the waived player. During the regular season they also have 48 hours to make a claim rather than minutes during the draft.

To add to the problem of getting a player through waivers during the regular season, less players are exempt from waivers during the regular season. During the regular season, any player who has played 3 years in the NHL or 180 NHL games is required to clear waivers prior to being sent to the farm team unless they had previously cleared waivers less than 30 days prior and had not played 10 NHL games or more since clearing waivers.

If Slegr or Ruutu can slip though the waiver draft unprotected, it will allow the Canucks to play musical chairs for a while with some of the waiver elegible players on the Moose. Slegr or Ruutu along with likely Lindgren or Langdon could be sent to the Moose with the ability to be called up at a moments notice until they themselves play 10 NHL games. If they can't slip someone through the waiver draft, then the Canucks will be very limited in being able to bring players up for short tryouts. It is not good to limit the players that can shift back & forth to the 22nd & 23rd roster players because that limits how long you can play musical chairs & limits using those spots for players that were exempt during the waiver draft, allowing pressbox players time on the Moose for conditioning or for adding players via trades. The team may even need to expose a regular roster player to waivers should the team make a trade which doesn't involve an equal number or more roster players heading back to the other team.

Detroit is not picking up Lindgren. They have protection problems of their own. If they do then thry'll have to drop someone like Devereaux.

These waiver drafts are not done in a void. The other team has to watch their list too. If Lindgren goes anywhere it will be to someone like Columbus who don't have too much too protect.
Actually the expansion teams often have more to protect than the older teams. Most players exposed in the waiver draft are fringe or 3rd/4th line players. Expansion teams are made up mostly of young top line players and tons of 3rd/4th line players very similar to what is availible to them in the draft. It's often the midrange teams that are looking for a specific 3rd/4th liner to fill a spot that dip into the waiver draft. At the same time, those same teams are very concious that they have to expose a player they would like to keep should they take a player on waivers.

Hiwayman - so you say we lose the likes of Slegr and Ruutu so we can bring up the likes of Kavanagh and Komarniski later on. I can't see how that makes sense.

The main point is that the Canucks are a pretty set team. I don't see them moving players back and forth that much. If they were a team that was in the building stage that would be more necessary. Frankly the only way most players on the Moose are going to play here is if someone has to go on the injured list.

Also if players like Slegr or Ruutu don't work out then we can dump them by putting them on waivers and sending them down if they are not taken thereby creating the room for other players to be brought up. But let's give them a chance to show what they can do before exposing them to other teams.

I guess I cannot see the need for flexibility being as great as you suggest. That's especailly true if we have to give up regular roster players to do it

Have you seen Minnesota's current roster? They'd pick a guy like Lindgren in a heart beat.

oh, and Davidsson isn't a nobody! He's a star in the SEL and on the national team. And the NHL is still in his plans for the future.

agree with orcatown.

true flexibility is nice, Canucks roster is pretty much set for this year at least, the last year before CBA, and the year they should be going for it, at least to make it deep...

unless injury occurs, i dont see too much playing time at NHL level for players such as Bouck/Kavanough.. etc

and if you expose Slegr, he is GONE 100%. if you expose Lindgren, after seeing what he can do when somewhat healthy last year, he could be gone as well.. I dont see how we can fill the void of Slegr by picking up another player through draft, or bring up someone from system as I see no onw who provides as much leadership/experience as Slegr does.

protect:

Cloutier
Hedberg
Naslund
Bertuzzi
Morrison
Sedin
Sedin
Arvedsson
Cooke
Chubarov
Linden
Ruutu
Jovonovski
Ohlund
Sopel
Salo
Slegr
May
Lindgren
Bouck

expose:

Malik
Allen
Langdon
:)

If the team is to make a more serious run in the playoffs this year, it is even more important that the Canucks have the flexibility to bring up & test some of their better prospects who will be playing on the Moose this year. I'm talking about players like Kavanagh, Bouck, Jokela, Ready, Komarniski & others being able to play up to 10 games on the Canucks during the regular season so that the Canucks will know if they can rely on them should they need them at the end of the season & in the playoffs. If we can slip a regular player though waivers, it is far, far easier to do during the wiaver draft than during the regular season. Personally I think Ruutu or Slegr would not be picked up on waivers during the waiver draft, but they would certainly be picked up if exposed during the regular season.

I question your theory but I will get to that later. In regards to the waiver draft, once a player clears during the draft they are not exempt from waivers for the rest of the season. You are not allowed to shuttle them at will back and forth from the farm. Once an unclaimed player plays 10 games in the NHL his waivers gained from exposing him during the waiver draft expire. If he has been on the NHL roster for more than 30 consecutive days his waivers expire.

Do you really think we should shuttle Slegr or Ruutu back and forth from Manitoba and either play them less than 10 games this season or send them down before they hit their 30 days on the roster so we can call up some kids to get a look? Sorry, but I disagree. The regular season will give us ample opportunity to take a look at them with injury callups, etc. You don't need to take an unnecessary risk at the waiver draft to accomplish this. Those types of things have ways of sorting themselves out over a long, 82 game schedule.

Here is the way it reads in the CBA ...

13.3. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the rights to
the services of a player may be loaned to a Club of another
league upon fulfillment of any of the following conditions,
except when elsewhere expressly prohibited:

(b) that the player was available for claim in the Waiver
Draft and was not claimed, that he has not played in ten or more
Regular Season or Playoff games cumulative since that Waiver
Draft and more than thirty days cumulative on a NHL Roster have
not passed since that Waiver Draft.

protect:

Cloutier
Hedberg
Naslund
Bertuzzi
Morrison
Sedin
Sedin
Arvedsson
Cooke
Chubarov
Linden
Ruutu
Jovonovski
Ohlund
Sopel
Salo
Slegr
May
Lindgren
Bouck

expose:

Malik
Allen
Langdon
:)

Good list, but I think I would swap Lindgren and Bouck for Malik and Allen. We are going to need more than 5 experienced NHL defenseman to make it through the season, and I think both Malik and Allen would get snatched up in a hearbeat.

Good list, but I think I would swap Lindgren and Bouck for Malik and Allen. We are going to need more than 5 experienced NHL defenseman to make it through the season, and I think both Malik and Allen would get snatched up in a hearbeat.

I agree. This shouldn't be strictly a list of player rankings. Remember that if a team makes a selection then they would have to expose another player on their protected list. Because of this it is unlikely that Bouck would get selected. Lindgren might get taken but I don't think it would impact the team as much as losing Malik or Allen (he still has some value in a trade).

I question your theory but I will get to that later. In regards to the waiver draft, once a player clears during the draft they are not exempt from waivers for the rest of the season. You are not allowed to shuttle them at will back and forth from the farm. Once an unclaimed player plays 10 games in the NHL his waivers gained from exposing him during the waiver draft expire. If he has been on the NHL roster for more than 30 consecutive days his waivers expire.

Do you really think we should shuttle Slegr or Ruutu back and forth from Manitoba and either play them less than 10 games this season or send them down before they hit their 30 days on the roster so we can call up some kids to get a look? Sorry, but I disagree. The regular season will give us ample opportunity to take a look at them with injury callups, etc. You don't need to take an unnecessary risk at the waiver draft to accomplish this. Those types of things have ways of sorting themselves out over a long, 82 game schedule.

Here is the way it reads in the CBA ...

13.3. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the rights to
the services of a player may be loaned to a Club of another
league upon fulfillment of any of the following conditions,
except when elsewhere expressly prohibited:

(b) that the player was available for claim in the Waiver
Draft and was not claimed, that he has not played in ten or more
Regular Season or Playoff games cumulative since that Waiver
Draft and more than thirty days cumulative on a NHL Roster have
not passed since that Waiver Draft.
Yes I was fully aware of the 10 game/30 day rule & mentioned it in the 4th paragraph of my post.

As for shunting Slegr, Ruutu & Lindgren back & forth between the Canucks & the Moose, I have no problem with that. Slegr, to me, is our #7 D & may even benefit from playing time on the Moose rather than sitting in the pressbox. I've got no problem with him sharing Canuck icetime with Jokela & Baumgartner in the first half of the season, with the best of the three getting all the ice time in the last half of the season.

The same goes for Ruutu & Lindgren sharing time with Bouck, Kavanagh, Keane, Reid & Kesler. They are playing on our 4th line. Even though Reid & Kesler don't have to clear waivers, they need a roster spot to play & during that time I don't have a problem sending either Ruutu, Langdon or Lindgren to the Moose for extra playing time.