This was literally posted today by MS in another thread where you brought the same thing about Gillis picking 10th. Sensing a trend here
http://slam.canoe.com/Slam/Columnists/Brennan/2008/06/21/5947311-sun.html
They called the Karlsson pick garbage.
Canucks Management and Ownership Thread v30.0 (Post #186)
- Thread starter PG Canuck
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
This was literally posted today by MS in another thread where you brought the same thing about Gillis picking 10th. Sensing a trend here
http://slam.canoe.com/Slam/Columnists/Brennan/2008/06/21/5947311-sun.html
They called the Karlsson pick garbage.
They obviously made a great pick but there were 14 teams that also passed on Karlsson and only 3 - Tampa, LA, and St. Louis - actually got a better player with their pick. So either Ottawa knew something no one else did or (more likely) nobody envisioned Karlsson becoming the elite talent he is today. Sucks we didn't have that info but what are ya gonna do? Hodgson was clearly the better prospect *at the time*.
Jimson Hogarth*
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2013
- 12,858
- 3
Seems reasonable. I wonder what gradin's take on karlsson was at the time. Results do matter, in the end though.
y2kcanucks
Better than you
Man, I wish 3 years into my job if my performance sucks I can still use my predecessor as an excuse.
True. Would actually be interesting to know if Swedish scouts in general were high on him or if it was only Ottawa's guy that really pushed hard. Interesting but ultimately unimportant.
HavlatMach9
streamable 3rah1
Our board was super excited when Karlsson got picked at 15. The board would have been thrilled having Hodgson too because of his performance at WJC.
Ducks would have picked Karlsson but they thought he'd fall a bit more and moved back, and the Sens got wind that they were picking Karlsson so they traded up.
Last edited:
Jimson Hogarth*
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2013
- 12,858
- 3
For sure. Just like Horvat at #9 when 80% of this board exploded with anger and disbelief at passing on Nichushkin. 3 years later the pick is lauded by everyone and their dog.
Remember that thread vankillwhale posted to compare Nichuskin and Horvat for the whole season?
TheWanderer
Registered User
- Nov 15, 2013
- 4,959
- 32
ughhh what a headache that whole scene was.
....wasn't Gillis still around at that time?
TheWanderer
Registered User
- Nov 15, 2013
- 4,959
- 32
y2kcanucks
Better than you
Mine fell through the paper and fell on the stairs so I went and got another one. The quality of ****, just like management.
This is still making me laugh, like an hour after I first read it.
I used to work at this place where we would have an annual general meeting for its members.
There was a member who gained a reputation for showing up with ziploc bags and grabbing as much food as possible and stashing it into bags when no-one was looking. People suspected her of this for years but she got away with it for awhile before someone was able to catch her red-handed.
Anyway, that's what I picture y2k doing at the town halls.
yeah the ground was completely covered in sandwiches that fell through the bag
So Gerard Gallant has been fired by the Florida Panthers and apparently he was well liked by the players and a big Gudbranson fan.
Would he be a good option to replace WD in due time?
Would he be a good option to replace WD in due time?
That's kind of the point I made about Gallagher saying Gillis liked Larkin. There are certainly some players in the draft who are considered better. But it isn't completely out of left field. I don't have the draft guide handy, but if I remember correctly, RLR ad some nice things to say about Karlsson especially his offensive upside. McKenzie, I see, had him ranked 20th. The choice was more or less Hodgson, Beach, or Myers if we are to go by the prevailing wisdom at the time.
Jack Tripper
Vey Falls Down
not to mention that gillis era canucks were usually operating with a deficit of draft picks as a result of having a goal of winning the stanley cup, therefore understandably often dealing picks at the deadline for short term help
it's completely inexcusable that benning is constantly operating with the same deficit of picks, especially since the new organisation goal is apparently trying to just compete to make the freaking playoffs
banme*
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2014
- 2,573
- 0
That's a bit misleading. Up front, I would add Zhukenov and McKenzie to Benning's list of forwards. And if Tommernes is going to be listed on D, Neill should too. Gillis also traded an elite goalie away to draft Horvat. Without Horvat, that prospect pool looks a lot weaker up front.
It is still a bit early to tell. They key is how the guys turn out. Horvat, Hutton, and Markstrom (granted who knows whether he will develop without Benning having sent him down) are gems. The rest? I'm not sure if any of them would end up playing 300 career NHL games to tell you the truth. Maybe Gaunce. I think what frightened me was that Gillis named Jensen and Fox as part of his list of prospects he considers to have a short and long term future with the Canucks. Fox wasn't even good enough to play in the AHL. That's as big of a misjudgement as thinking McKenzie can play in the AHL.
The same thing with Benning's picks so far. Stecher and Tryamkin are NHL caliber players now IMO. The rest? I think Boeser will make it but he's no Horvat. Juolevi is going to make it. Virtanen is going to have an NHL role I think. I like Lockwood and Demko but who knows.
- Status
