Comments on: Canucks continue to add defensemen, sign Vandermeer

By: dmacnico

dmacnico — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 05:17:15 +0000

Only played for San Jose last year. No playoff games

By: kitshky

kitshky — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:24:34 +0000

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

By: davebabychreturns

davebabychreturns — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:12:45 +0000

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.

By: broadstbully33

broadstbully33 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:06:58 +0000

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

By: davebabychreturns

davebabychreturns — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:05:13 +0000

Yeah you just might.

By: broadstbully33

broadstbully33 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:02:06 +0000

I shouldn’t have said only marketable

By: broadstbully33

broadstbully33 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:00:28 +0000

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

By: broadstbully33

broadstbully33 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:58:58 +0000

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

By: elvispocomo

elvispocomo — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:47:05 +0000

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.

By: kitshky

kitshky — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:46:45 +0000

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.)

By: valoisvipers

valoisvipers — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:46:29 +0000

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

By: sjsharks66

sjsharks66 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:44:04 +0000

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

By: elvispocomo

elvispocomo — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:44:03 +0000

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).

By: loinstache

loinstache — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:39:25 +0000

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

By: broadstbully33

broadstbully33 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:36:27 +0000

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

By: loinstache

loinstache — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:32:49 +0000

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

By: clawedjeroo28

clawedjeroo28 — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:24:14 +0000

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