Skip to content

Canucks continue to add defensemen, sign Vandermeer

Jan 14, 2013, 2:15 PM EST

Jim Vandermeer

For the second straight day, the Vancouver Canucks have signed a veteran NHL defenseman.

On Monday, the club announced it had agreed to terms with Jim Vandermeer — roughly 24 hours after inking Cam Barker to a one-year, $700,000 deal.

Vandermeer’s deal is a one-year, two-way contract with a $600,000 salary/cap hit at the NHL level.

The 32-year-old has played in 461 career NHL games and split last season between Edmonton (2G-12A-14PTS in 62 games played) and San Jose (1G-3A-4PTS in 25 games played).

Barker and Vandermeer have plenty in common. Both have played for both the Oilers and Blackhawks — in fact, the two were teammates in Chicago during the 2007-08 season.

With these moves, the Canucks now have 10 defensemen under contract (Kevin Bieksa, Jason Garrison, Dan Hamhuis, Alex Edler, Keith Ballard, Andrew Alberts, Chris Tanev, Derek Joslin, Barker, Vandermeer.)

  1. clawedjeroo28 - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:24 PM

    I think this means Luongo isn’t going anywhere fast. They’d be getting a solid dman back as part of any trade I’m sure. Wouldn’t make sense to sign a few defenseman now if a big trade is in the works

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 14, 2013 at 3:12 PM

      I don’t think this has anything to do with a Luongo trade, Vandermeer had been working out in Vancouver in the summer and making overtures about signing here.

      As was already mentioned further down, the Canucks are simply stockpiling veteran defensemen because they know that like every year they are going to get 9 or 10 guys into the lineup over the course of the season and NHL calibre defenseman get harder and harder to come by as the year presses on.

  2. loinstache - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

    Ermm no, the Canucks are loaded on D and all rumours and rumblings from the media and Vancouvers front office involve their forward depth. This solidifies a Luo trade to me, hints he may be a piece in a trade with either Ballard or Edler

  3. broadstbully33 - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:36 PM

    Elder or bieska will be moved with loungo this further indicates a possible move to Philly or three way trade involving Toronto

    • loinstache - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:39 PM

      Completely agreed save for the bieksa part, again no reason at all for the canucks to move him

    • kitshky - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM

      This doesn’t indicate anything except that once again (like every year) Gillis and the Canucks are stockpiling veteran Dmen in camp to see if they can find a hidden deal they can resurrect and slip into the lineup for depth.

      (…and way to pull a Bieksa trade directly out of your ass.)

    • elvispocomo - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:47 PM

      Bieksa has an NTC, so don’t see him included. No Canucks fans want to see Edler moved, unless the return is excellent (on top of what Luongo brings back) but there’s a small chance something could involve him. More likely Ballard would be moved as his contract’s a bit high for a bottom pairing D-man, and the extra signings would be nice depth in that case.

  4. elvispocomo - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:44 PM

    Joslin hasn’t been great with the Wolves, so it’s most likely Barker and Vandermeer trying for the 8th spot (with a dark horse in Connauton).

  5. sjsharks66 - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:44 PM

    Was never really a fan of him. Tough guy though, will drop the gloves and smile the entire time.

  6. valoisvipers - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM

    If you add Edler in with Luongo then you might find a taker out there.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 14, 2013 at 3:05 PM

      Yeah you just might.

  7. broadstbully33 - Jan 14, 2013 at 2:58 PM

    Ballard is just a put filler or salary dump at this point. Edler and bieska are vancuvers only marketable defenseman.

  8. broadstbully33 - Jan 14, 2013 at 3:00 PM

    If Vancouver is eyeing schenn or couts in a deal elder or bieska would def be in the deal but its more unlikely because if homer didn’t trade either for weber he won’t for either of them

  9. broadstbully33 - Jan 14, 2013 at 3:02 PM

    I shouldn’t have said only marketable

  10. broadstbully33 - Jan 14, 2013 at 3:06 PM

    And to take it one step further I would say elder would prob be the most likely as he still has youth on his side. Then again it’s pure speculation out of a necessity of the flyers

    • kitshky - Jan 14, 2013 at 5:24 PM

      The only way Edler is involved in a trade is because of his free agency status and the upcoming salary cap.

  11. dmacnico - Jan 15, 2013 at 12:17 AM

    Only played for San Jose last year. No playoff games

Featured video

Holiday wish lists for NHL teams
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. B. Bishop (2783)
  2. S. Crosby (2455)
  3. B. Elliott (2309)
  4. C. Perry (2272)
  5. J. Howard (1888)
  1. J. Schwartz (1864)
  2. S. Varlamov (1812)
  3. S. Mason (1749)
  4. T. Johnson (1703)
  5. S. Weiss (1608)