Gilbert Brule looking to sign in Vancouver?

Cam Charron
July 05 2013 11:35AM

Interesting tweet from News 1130 here…

…for the last couple of months or so, I've been intrigued with the idea that there's a market inefficiency when it comes to former high draft picks that never panned out. This comes from Tyler Dellow's excellent post noting that Bottom Six forwards are predominantly high draft picks.

Not everybody taken in the first round becomes a superstar or a scorer. Raffi Torres was a 5th overall pick, once upon a time, and Manny Malhotra was once taken at 7th. Gilbert Brule was a stud in junior hockey and was taken 6th overall in 2005, or "the Sidney Crosby draft" and simply never panned into an NHL scorer.

Brule was a name that intrigues me, and not just because he's a local boy and a former Vancouver Giant. He's just a name that you come across when you're looking for free agents that were recently drafted pretty high. With Wojtek Wolski into the KHL and Benoit Pouliot probably going to be a little more expensive, Brule is as undervalued as you can get. He didn't get a job in the 2013 season.

Brule made himself useful on Phoenix's bottom six when they went to the Conference Finals with the Coyotes. He was an 8-minute player in the playoffs facing lousy comp but was a plus-possession player. I don't think he's a star, but if you're looking for a depth centreman for cheap, why not Gilbert?

63811cbf517d2d685ea09e103488ea3a
Cam Charron is a BC hockey fan that writes about hockey on many different websites including this one.
Avatar
#1 Jeff Angus
July 05 2013, 11:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

An easy yes if he takes a near minimum contract.

Avatar
#2 van
July 05 2013, 12:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Gordon gets $3, Cullen gets $3.5, Stalberg gets $3, can't afford Hendricks either. Not like we have a lot of options.

Avatar
#3 JCDavies
July 05 2013, 12:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

What a morning ... does Booth's contract have any trade value yet?

Avatar
#4 puck-bandit
July 05 2013, 12:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I don't think there is a team in the league that would look at Booth, plus he's still on IR. This is truly frustrating, I've been sitting here casting envy on all of last years not so great teams sign players like they won the lottery.

Is it true that we signed our Stick Boy as a second line Centre?

Avatar
#5 NM00
July 05 2013, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Booth didn't get bought out.

So, no, he doesn't have value.

Cullen gone. Gordon gone.

Nashville signs Matt Hendricks.

Strike three.

Avatar
#6 JCDavies
July 05 2013, 01:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@NM00

"Booth didn't get bought out.

So, no, he doesn't have value."

That's not what I wrote.

Avatar
#7 NM00
July 05 2013, 01:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@JCDavies

My point is that the only way Booth would have had value is if he was bought out like Ballard.

Booth was essentially given by Florida two years ago.

Nobody wants that contract. Just like Ballard pre-buyout. Just like Luongo post-buyout window.

Avatar
#8 JCDavies
July 05 2013, 01:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@NM00

The problem with Booth is his contract. I've seen a lot of teams willing to take on bad contracts today...

Avatar
#9 NM00
July 05 2013, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
JCDavies wrote:

The problem with Booth is his contract. I've seen a lot of teams willing to take on bad contracts today...

Booth had 1 goal last year. And only played 12 games.

I repeat: nobody wants him. If Gillis could have given him away, he would have done it by now.

It's just like Canuck fans thinking someone would take on Ballard's contract because of his name value.

Considering Booth was given away 2 years ago, what exactly makes you think he has even maintained his trade value?

Avatar
#10 JCDavies
July 05 2013, 02:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@NM00

"I repeat: nobody..."

*sigh*

You're missing the point: it wasn't really about Booth, it was about bad contracts and irrational behavior.

Avatar
#11 NM00
July 05 2013, 02:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@JCDavies

You're missing my point.

Booth does not fit in with today's "bad contracts" or whatever you want to call them.

The majority of these "bad contracts" pertain to players who played well in the recent past.

That precludes Booth. His value has been trending down for years. Like Ballard.

Avatar
#12 JCDavies
July 05 2013, 02:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@NM00

Did the price of replacing Booth go up today or down today? I can't figure this out...

Avatar
#13 NM00
July 05 2013, 03:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@JCDavies

Personally, I'd have rather swapped out Booth and brought in Matt Cullen's contract. And use the savings on depth I suppose.

Not that Cullen would have necessarily wanted a role decrease in Vancouver.

Considering how top heavy the Canucks roster is (10 players and $50 mil), there are better ways to use the Booth money.

Though Booth is certainly a useful player in some capacity when healthy.

Comments are closed for this article.