Ten Cases For Keeping Kyle Wellwood (Video Montage)
We still make fun of Wellwood's weight issues, even though he did almost everything to silence his critics. There is no news on Woody's arbitration hearings yet, but I hope it gets resolved and it makes sense financially for the Canucks to keep him.
Just for your viewing pleasure (and because there is no Canucks news to speak of), here are some Wellwood highlights from the 2008-09 season: Enjoy...and remember the might of the Wood.
1. TSN praises Wellwood's holy name after Game 1 of the Vancouver-Chicago series:
2. Wellwood gets more praise from TSN and heckled by his teammates a little.
3. Woody makes King Henrik look silly.
4. Kyle scores a shootout goal on Marty Turco.
5. He makes Jonas Hiller look stupid in a shootout as well.
6. Smile Woodrow, you monster.
0 recs |
34 comments
|
Comments
I was sitting about 6 rows up towards the side where Welly scored that goal vs. the Rangers at MSG. Man that awesome. That whole game was awesome. That was the most enjoyable Canucks game I’ve ever been to.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 19, 2009 3:53 AM PDT reply actions
Damn you had nice seats. I was six rows from the roof.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 19, 2009 6:52 AM PDT up reply actions
A friend’s family has a pair of season tickets and he gave them to me for that game. I went with someone I knew who was going to school in NY, her first ever time seeing hockey (she’s Australian). I taught her to be a Canucks fan. They were magnificent seats and it was a magnificent performance by our boys.
I took a bus into New York that afternoon and after the game a bus back out to Boston at half past midnight (after, of course, hitting up a pub in midtown). Got back to Boston at around 4:15… then home around 4:45. Had class at 9. 8 hours of travel to and from NYC for a 3 hour hockey game. It was so worthwhile.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 19, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions
i might be wrong
i would really love to see pudge back next year.
i didnt see lots of canucks really give everything they had in the finals. where the fuck was kessler (giving away stupid penalties in one period of a do or die final dosn’t count) where was burrows and dont get me started on obrien.
so pudge wants some more cash and i dont see why we dont give it to him. we gave brain dead obrien extra cash, yes i know we need blue liners and have plenty of forwards but a 60% pay rise for a guy who tells the coach how to coach and tells the media he isnt happy, come on.
we need a team built on grit, determination and selfless players. lets start with the pudge he may not be the best but he stepped up we the going got tough. which more than lots of players on the canucks can say.
by svenfromsweeden on Jul 19, 2009 11:21 AM PDT reply actions
Burrows was injured, for the record. But Kes was a let down – I’m confident that he can step it up though.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 19, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Was is it just me, or did Kesler stop being effective after taking that cheap shot from Ladd.
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
I have forgotten pretty much everything from that series, other than the fact that it was the most frustrating thing ever.
All aboard the Jahvid Best rickshaw!
by rollonubears on Jul 20, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Bear in mind
He played like this for half a season (plus playoffs). He’s a rock-solid third line centre who can produce on the power play, if he can keep that level of intensity. He was also waived twice in a matter of months, and showed up well over playing weight. I can certainly understand management taking a “prove it” approach.
Love to have him back, though. And yeah, I was surprised at the bump in O’Brien’s salary. Not earned, I don’t think.
“which is more than lots of players on the canucks can say” i cant speak english when i rant sorry
by svenfromsweeden on Jul 19, 2009 3:16 PM PDT reply actions
Hey no problem. We aren’t here to critique your english. :)
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 19, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Just as I thought I had got over Canucks' 2nd-round playoff exit,
it’s all coming back now. How in the world did they lose their series 2-4?!
Canucks need players with a scoring touch and hockey sense, and Wellwood certainly has it.
In the battle of the strong, victory goes to the brave.
Up against hyperactive teens on an adrenaline rush. We’ll get ’em offa our lawns next year. Dang kids!
We had the goals, just a lack of composure
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 19, 2009 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions
i blame luongo
If we had raycroft back then, none of this would have happened :)
Show Welly the money. He is worth it
by Temujin on Jul 20, 2009 8:30 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
If the price is anywhere near the tipping point, I vote no. Let him walk and take his chances. I’m pro Hodgson over Pudge, coming soon to a pissed off fanpost near you.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
Our problem right now: we have a whole bunch of good, but barely any great on offense. The Sedins are great. Burrows and Kesler are both very very good (and I presume Kesler is going to be in the great column by the end of the year). Everyone else (Demitra, Wellwood, Raymond, Hansen, Bernier) is good, but no one is great. I think the only one there who has a chance at being great is Raymond. It is a very annoying spot to be in. Because nobody is bad enough to truly justify getting rid of them, but nobody is good enough that we absolutely have to keep them. Puts you in a confusing position on what you should do with certain players.
All aboard the Jahvid Best rickshaw!
by rollonubears on Jul 20, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
The cap has made this the problem with most teams. It’s why I think you see some teams rise to the top simply because they have more of the Sedin-type caliber players (i.e. they make players around them better). Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago all have them. That’s even more of a reason to trust Hodgson down the middle with still projects Bernier and Raymond flanking him instead of Pudge: he has the pedigree, so we’re told, to make the players around him better.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying Wellwood isn’t worth keeping around in the bottom six, but he’s replaceable and we have a building block aiming at his spot. It’s his own choice to go to arbitration, I’m just not certain it’s in his best interest if he wanted to be a member of this team.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Wellwood, based on his increasingly good defense, especially in the playoffs, and his career high goal total last year, and his ability to assist others in scoring, may rise, this year, a few levels above what he’s done in his career. Based on this assumption, I feel he’s more than worth holding on to.
by Bobby Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions
18 goals and a great faceoff %
cannot be expected to be replaced by a 19 year old with no NHL experience (unless that 19 yr old is named Crosby).
That’s reason enough to re-sign him, imo.
Tough call. Where and when does Hodgson fit in then? On Wellwood’s wing?
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 20, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Bernier-Hodgson-Raymond. If Bernier uses his body and learns how to bury rebounds, Raymond keeps his speed and Hodgson adapts quickly, that’s got a great deal of potential.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I firmly disagree. Hodgson can eclipse that production if given the chance with decent linemates, not subbing around on the fourth line.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah but having Welly give you options in case Hodgson needs adjustment. Hodgson is still an unknown. We can always trade either him or Raymond later if Hodgson works out as hoped.
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Him being Welly. No trading Hodgson!
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 20, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Why did I forget about Raymond? Oh right because I love Sir Finebark of the Woodshire. haha.
Something’s got to give. We have too many forwards.
by Sean Zandberg on Jul 20, 2009 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, that’s why I said keeping him around is fine. But trading him assumes someone would want him and he’s a single year removed from being ignored on waivers twice and now is taking the one team that gambled on him to arbitration. He also left Toronto under bad auspices too, so I’d suspect he’s not as widely regarded by the 29 other GMs out there as Vancouver fans may think.
That aside, what precisely are Wellwood’s wonderful contributions?
Pudge’s 27 points put him in the same family as Jochen Hecht ($2.3 million), Kyle Brodziak ($495,000), Andy Hilbert ($650,000), and Mike Comrie ($3.3 million). The lone difference were his 10 PP goals (55.5% of his total production last year) which you can argue is an anomaly as it’s over double his career best (meanwhile his three PP assists was a career worst). Also at least five of those goals were rebounds off the board that found Wellwood with an open net staring at him.Wonderful timing, but not a skill that’s going to repeat itself year to year. On average, both Hansen and everyone’s punching bag Bernier had better point paces.
Demitra(!) and Hansen blocked more shots. Pudge had the third most giveaways on the team. His plus/minus was 2, good enough for 277th best in the league. And yes he had great face off percentage. So did Yanic Perreault in yester years and he was averaging damn near 12-15 points more a season in less games than Pudge.
If I’m Mike Gillis, I would have offered him a meager raise and said “look, last year was nice but you still need to improve all around. Show 08-09 wasn’t a fluke and we’ll talk serious contract last year.” A similar tact he he did with SOB and SOB played along.
What’s Wellwood do? No doubt his agent is gunning for Hecht money. So this team could be more financially handicapped – making it that much harder for Gillis to retain Luongo or fix the remaining holes in the lineup – based on nothing more than faceoffs and the presence of mind to get the Salo ricochet off the boards on the PP?
I’m not convinced at all either of these can be (a) duplicated by Wellwood and (b) replaced by someone else. And we’re staring at the CHL player of the year who can play in the exact same position and brings (again on paper) far more to the table. It’s a gamble either way, but Pudge chose this path. If the arbitrator rewards him anything about the 1.5 million range, I eagerly await Gillis telling him to go piss up a flagpoll and walk away.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 21, 2009 2:59 AM PDT up reply actions
He was good in the playoffs though. That’s worth something. But yeah, I think 1.5 mill is about right. I think the fact that we signed SOB to 1.6 mill made welly’s eyes grow (eyes are still smaller than his stomach, though)
by Beantown Canuck on Jul 21, 2009 3:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Still a single season. It’s the SOB rules all over again: prove you’re better than your mistakes, prove last year’s successes weren’t a fluke and he’ll show you the right money at the right length (see the Sedins, Burrows & Edler and what I presume will be Kesler and Mitchell soon).
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Jul 21, 2009 3:29 AM PDT up reply actions

by 
























