Gillis on Beach / Hodgson

In article <e548d249-2c2f-4b0d-aaae-b842e4e7304b
@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?
Anders_Elkj=E6r_Johansen?= <andersej.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:

>> http://tinyurl.com/6x292p
>>
>> Jim
>
>At least he mentioned 'skill'. That's a first I believe...

Heh, I think so too. That's the good news. The bad news is he was
referring to his skill in taking the assorted personality and IQ tests
administered by the sports psychologist.

Jim)
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

foamy wrote:

>
> That's good, keep hope alive, Beach might have 40 goals and 100 pts by
> then.
>

....didn't someone post that he has a concussion history?

I'm sick of all our players being out with injuries all the time. Jovo,
Ohlund, Salo, Cloutier, Bieksa, Kesler, Cooke, Morrison...Jeeez!

I'd probably have drafted Beach too but this pick could just as easily
prove to be the best one. Neither one of these guys would be the future
of the club anyway. Either one would be lucky to see regular duty on
the second line - in four years.

Wayne
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <3Ya7k.429$yg7.255@edtnps82>,
mad-dog <wbennetts.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:

>....didn't someone post that he has a concussion history?

Reports say he had 2, he said he had one and it was no big deal. He
was sucker punched and KO'd, don't know if that is the 1 or the 2.
It wouldn't stop me from taking him even if it was 2.

>I'm sick of all our players being out with injuries all the time. Jovo,
>Ohlund, Salo, Cloutier, Bieksa, Kesler, Cooke, Morrison...Jeeez!
>
>I'd probably have drafted Beach too but this pick could just as easily
>prove to be the best one. Neither one of these guys would be the future
>of the club anyway. Either one would be lucky to see regular duty on
>the second line - in four years.

Oh oh Wayne. I say Beach plays this year and never hits the minors.
[ if he does, it would only be briefly imo, because Chicago wanted to
ease him in ]. Beach is the only legit power forward around, and barring
injury should have a long and productive career 1st or second line. He
has been compared favorably to the old Bert with some suggesting he'll
be better, because of a mean streak and affinity for dropping 'em.

Central Scouting said of him:

" One of the top forwards in this year's draft and is probably the most
competitive – from the blue line in there is no one that competes like him. He
has good scoring skills and a very accurate shot, and from the blue line in,
once he gets the puck, he almost owns it. "

I haven't said anything negative about Hodgson, he could turn out to be
an ok pick. My beef is with Gillis passing up on a guy who could be a draft
homerun in favor of a guy he thinks is at least 2 yrs away. The guy he passed
on possesses everything the team needs. The guy he took, has leadership
potential. Whoopie.

Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

foamy wrote:
> In article <3Ya7k.429$yg7.255@edtnps82>,
> mad-dog <wbennetts RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> ....didn't someone post that he has a concussion history?
>
> Reports say he had 2, he said he had one and it was no big deal. He
> was sucker punched and KO'd, don't know if that is the 1 or the 2.
> It wouldn't stop me from taking him even if it was 2.
>
>> I'm sick of all our players being out with injuries all the time. Jovo,
>> Ohlund, Salo, Cloutier, Bieksa, Kesler, Cooke, Morrison...Jeeez!
>>
>> I'd probably have drafted Beach too but this pick could just as easily
>> prove to be the best one. Neither one of these guys would be the future
>> of the club anyway. Either one would be lucky to see regular duty on
>> the second line - in four years.
>
> Oh oh Wayne. I say Beach plays this year and never hits the minors.
> [ if he does, it would only be briefly imo, because Chicago wanted to
> ease him in ]. Beach is the only legit power forward around, and barring
> injury should have a long and productive career 1st or second line. He
> has been compared favorably to the old Bert with some suggesting he'll
> be better, because of a mean streak and affinity for dropping 'em.
>
> Central Scouting said of him:
>
> " One of the top forwards in this year's draft and is probably the most
> competitive – from the blue line in there is no one that competes like him. He
> has good scoring skills and a very accurate shot, and from the blue line in,
> once he gets the puck, he almost owns it. "
>
> I haven't said anything negative about Hodgson, he could turn out to be
> an ok pick. My beef is with Gillis passing up on a guy who could be a draft
> homerun in favor of a guy he thinks is at least 2 yrs away. The guy he passed
> on possesses everything the team needs. The guy he took, has leadership
> potential. Whoopie.
>
> Jim
>
>

Well, like I said I would most likely have chosen Beach too, if I was
making the decisions.

Wayne
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

"foamy" <bombelly.RemoveThis@sulet.ten> wrote in message
news:z2c7k.536$2G6.201@edtnps83...
>
> I haven't said anything negative about Hodgson, he could turn out to be
> an ok pick. My beef is with Gillis passing up on a guy who could be a
> draft
> homerun in favor of a guy he thinks is at least 2 yrs away. The guy he
> passed
> on possesses everything the team needs. The guy he took, has leadership
> potential. Whoopie.
>
> Jim
>
Now Jim, be patient. This is only phase 1 of Gillis's strategy. It's
irrelevent who he drafts. As long as the draftee has ICK and with Gillis's
incredible "player development" plans, Hodgson should be playing with the
Cory Schneider-led Canucks in 2 years, tops.
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <8oc7k.432$yg7.430@edtnps82>,
mad-dog <wbennetts RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:

>Well, like I said I would most likely have chosen Beach too, if I was
>making the decisions.
>
>Wayne


Yep, I'm just trying to rant myself out so I can climb out of this friggin
depressing disappointing hole Gillis threw me in.

Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <RTc7k.557$2G6.67@edtnps83>, "
Nelson Lee" <chemistry_83.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Now Jim, be patient. This is only phase 1 of Gillis's strategy. It's
>irrelevent who he drafts. As long as the draftee has ICK and with Gillis's
>incredible "player development" plans, Hodgson should be playing with the
>Cory Schneider-led Canucks in 2 years, tops.

Heh, you'd think though with his incredible player development plans,
he'd be able to reform low-life low-character guys like Jokinen and Beach.

You know, your ' irrelevant who he drafts as long as he has high ICK ' is
exactly the feeling I got a couple days ago.

" We're not finished yet," Gillis said. " We need to do a bunch of other
things. "

Wow, what stamina. I thought he'd be exhausted after all he's done so far.
Hopefully we can keep up.

Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

> I haven't said anything negative about Hodgson, he could turn out to be
> an ok pick. My beef is with Gillis passing up on a guy who could be a
> draft
> homerun in favor of a guy he thinks is at least 2 yrs away. The guy he
> passed
> on possesses everything the team needs. The guy he took, has leadership
> potential. Whoopie.
>
> Jim

Well, we haven't had a proper Captain since just before we signed MEssier,
so maybe he's addressing all the issues, rather than just the gaping hole at
centre.

At least we still have a goalie.

Bob
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <B8e7k.44804$gc5.36870@pd7urf2no>,
"Floats in Water" <nospam.RemoveThis@nospam.ca> wrote:

>Well, we haven't had a proper Captain since just before we signed MEssier,
>so maybe he's addressing all the issues, rather than just the gaping hole at
>centre.

So who will be captain in the intervening 2 years or more before our new
and improved captain can make the league ? :-)

>At least we still have a goalie.

By passing on Luongo's best friend--not for longo.

Jim)
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <1d0qbduoob3p8.16t26dn6ow4s.dlg RemoveThis @40tude.net>,
Gary <gary RemoveThis @stopthespam.com> wrote:

> I thought Gillis was saying that while the Canucks are a smallish team
>right now and thus it might appear odd to draft another 'smaller' player,
>in another couple of years the team may have revamped itself into a much
>larger team and will be in a better position to carry and protect a smaller
>forward.

Except he's said it with respect to all shapes and sizes. It's as if the
team a couple years down the road will just materialize out of thin air
without any input from himself now and he wants to be prepared for
the surprise.

If he's going to have a big team in two years, wouldn't you draft Beach
before the small guy the big guys like Beach have to protect ? Isn't it as
simple as you draft small guys, you'll have a small team and visa versa ?

The same principle applies to trades and fa's. I would think you should
have an idea where you want to be, and act accordingly. But in his defense,
the ICK factor will play a major role. Who knows, next week a 5'2" 125 pound
undrafted mensa candidate might show up on his doorstep for a tryout.

I think your explanation is about as close as we'll get to cogency, and
you should be commended for the effort, but Mr. Bold still has some
'splainin to do before I'll get it. :-)

Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

foamy wrote:
> In article <1d0qbduoob3p8.16t26dn6ow4s.dlg.RemoveThis@40tude.net>,
> Gary <gary.RemoveThis@stopthespam.com> wrote:
>
>> I thought Gillis was saying that while the Canucks are a smallish team
>> right now and thus it might appear odd to draft another 'smaller' player,
>> in another couple of years the team may have revamped itself into a much
>> larger team and will be in a better position to carry and protect a smaller
>> forward.
>
> Except he's said it with respect to all shapes and sizes. It's as if the
> team a couple years down the road will just materialize out of thin air
> without any input from himself now and he wants to be prepared for
> the surprise.
>
> If he's going to have a big team in two years, wouldn't you draft Beach
> before the small guy the big guys like Beach have to protect ? Isn't it as
> simple as you draft small guys, you'll have a small team and visa versa ?
>
> The same principle applies to trades and fa's. I would think you should
> have an idea where you want to be, and act accordingly. But in his defense,
> the ICK factor will play a major role. Who knows, next week a 5'2" 125 pound
> undrafted mensa candidate might show up on his doorstep for a tryout.
>
> I think your explanation is about as close as we'll get to cogency, and
> you should be commended for the effort, but Mr. Bold still has some
> 'splainin to do before I'll get it. :-)
>
> Jim
>

Besides Hodgson, how many acquisitions has he made that lead you to
believe he doesn't plan on improving the the size of the team other than
through good karma? Hodgson was a better pick than Beach according to
just about everybody that had an interest in ranking them, and he fell
into their lap. If Gillis would have picked Beach and passed on Hodgson,
you'd be complaining that if he wanted an agitator, then he could've
brought back Cooke and Ruutu for a lot less than giving up Hodgson.

Scott
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

In article <g3k8ce$duh$1@aioe.org>,
Scotty <Lah.RemoveThis@de.da> wrote:

>I'll finish that for you. ISS has had Hodgson ranked ahead of Beach
>since December.

I was going to mention them but I don't know how influential they are
in relation to Central Scouting. As an aside, I think much of what made
the game great, if not the game, was the suspense and challenge of
finding good draft picks, prior to when the league went to a pool.
Delorme can sit in a bar in Regina and scout off the web.


>Cheap shot? Not in my books, but sorry if you see it that way. That
>reaction would definitely be *my* reaction, anyway.

You know I wouldn't equate Beach with ' agitators ' Cooke and Ruutu.
That would be like calling Probert a pest.

Jim
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson 

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 01:36:12 GMT, bombelly.DeleteThis@sulet.ten (foamy) wrote:

>You know I wouldn't equate Beach with ' agitators ' Cooke and Ruutu.
>That would be like calling Probert a pest.


If you are comparing Beach to probert I am now really happy they did
not draft him.

Tough guy,good player and a complete nutcase.
 >> Stay informed about: Gillis on Beach / Hodgson