Bert Diesel

Members
  • Content Count

    411
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

309 Excellent

About Bert Diesel

  • Rank
    Comets Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

1,664 profile views
  1. 1. Podkolzin 2. Hoglander 3. Dipietro 4. Madden 5. Rathbone 6. Juolevi 7. Lind 8. Rafferty 9. Woo 10. Brisebois 11. Macewen 12. Lockwood 13. Perron 14. Teves 15. Gadjovich 16. Focht 17. McDonagh 18. Silovs 19. Palmu 20. Utunen
  2. If those two (Rathbone and Tryamkin) could play the right side it would certainly help to balance the depth chart. Rathbone's emergence in the propsect pool is huge and although I've been critical of the asset managment of the Canucks in the past few years, it's hard to deny that they seem to have a pretty solid track record overall at the draft. Even the guys that don't pan out seem to show strong improvements. I hope they continue to keep their picks for at least two more years to build up VAncouver and Utica.
  3. Tryamkin is a LD along with Rathbone. Right shot defenders continue to be a weakness in the prospect pool with only Rafferty and Woo looking legit. Woo has not been great so far this year either. Rathbone looking like a stud and tryamkin coming back could offset juolevi’s Injury woes long term.
  4. He is very young for his draft year, playing very low minutes in the KHL. 2ppg average against his peers. If he was in the CHL he'd be a huge producer. It's all about context, there is literally nothing to worry about. Wait for the World Juniors
  5. I'd rather have MCcan but it doesn't matter now. The 2nd rounder included in the original Gudbranson deal was the thing that killed us. Could've been Carter Hart, DeBrincat or Girard. Thankfully we redeemed the trade to some extent because Pearson is a vastly superior player to Gudbranson. More and more I think Guddy does not belong in the NHL, he just doesn't have the puck skills or agility. I was ecstatic when we got rid of his contract, not because I was that enthusiastic about Pearson but I knew losing Gudbranson and his contract would be addition by subtraction. He was awful. Pearson fitting in with Bo and playing well has been a bonus. As it stands, Pearson for MCcan and a 2nd rounder isn't a great trade but its not terrible. Pearson is definitely the type of player we've been missing and can play up and down the lineup.
  6. Not sure I agree. The center depth is not good. Gravoac is injured but they’re still woefully thin at that spot. I think they expected Gaudette in Utica. Winger and defensive depth is the best since I can remember but this team can’t be a Calder cup contender without acquiring another solid center
  7. Top 30 Canucks Prospects 1. Hughes 2. Podkolzin 3. Demko 4. Juolevi 5. Hoglander 6. Woo 7. Madden 8. Dipietro 9. Macewen 10. Rathbone 11.Lind 12. Jasek 13. Lockwood 14. Keppen 15. Brisebois 16. L. Karlsson 17. Sautner 18. Gadjovich 19. Utunen 20. Chatfield 21. Focht 22. Malone 23. Palmu 24. Kielly 25. Plasek 26. Silovs 27. Thiessen 28. McDonagh 29. Manuykan 30 .Costmar
  8. Good work on this and appreciate the research. It's nice when people have actually done the calculations themselves and drawn their own conclusions. I could argue with some minor parts of this lineup but it's mostly accurate. They have usually gone with 8 D and 13 forwards but it seems like here you've included 14 forwards and 7 D. This is a real possibility but your lineup is one man short since Roussel will be on LITR (as you've stated) and on your cap is counting as the 14th forward. That means that one more player will have to be on the roster counting towards the cap, making it even tighter. Also consider what happens when Roussel gets back, there clearly isn't enough cap room for everyone. Your right that there isn't a huge conundrum and maybe the title of the thread should have had a question mark at the end. The real issues come down the road if we can't move Eriksson and some other dead weight and we have to pay Petterson, Hughes, etc. As others have stated in this thread, the hope is that the cap rises significantly making these issues less contentious.
  9. Yes. Yes I do. That's what cap room can give you if it isn't tied up in bottom six players. I'm not saying it's a great idea to add Barrie on some terrible contract but it would be nice to have the option of signing someone like him while our core players are still being underpaid on their entry level deals. It could still happened but it looks like it might be hard to move some of these salaries out.
  10. I would rather keep Stecher, who is criminally underrated because of his size, than lose him because of inept salary cap management. This is my point. Although the situation isn't as bad as it could be, we will have to lose good players in order to add high end talent. Not ideal.
  11. Really, Beagle isn't overpaid? I wouldn't have had a problem with Beagle at 2 million for 3 years but 3x4 is an egregious contract. I wish I had your optimism about Canucks management but show me another 4th line center in the league that has this type of contract. Barrie would be a very nice piece and saying their is no need for him is strange. I might have a problem with him getting paid more than 8$ x 5 but he would fit very nicely on the team. He fits probably the biggest need on the team, an offensively gifted right shot defenseman; they don't grow on trees. If you can add one of these guys and surrender nothing but cap space then, your winning the asset management game.
  12. Also, let's hypothetically imagine that Tyson Barrie wants to come to Vancouver next season. He would be a huge piece that could shore up the right side of the D, a weakness for ages and a weak part of our prospect pool. Even if he wants to come here on a hometown discount, how can we fit him under the cap? The only way is to trade other assets like prospects and picks to get rid of our bad contracts. This is where these contracts create issues. We need to continue the momentum of building our prospect base as Utica hasn't been a juggernaught yet and we are just beginning to see the fruits of the previous 3-4 drafts.
  13. I agree with you here. I'm not sure which part of my previous post you disagreed with then? My point is that both the Benning bro's and the ultra negative crowd are both not seeing a complete picture. The salary cap conundrum will prevent us from being serious contenders for a couple years but solve itself in about 3 years.
  14. I don't mind Beagle. In isolation that contract isn't as terrible as others think and he's a nice piece as a penalty killer and a gritty 4th C. He is better on a good team and will have better numbers with better wingers but he isn't a huge upgrade from a replacement level player like Cracknell we had a few years back. For that money and term he's being paid as a 3rd line center compared to the rest of the league. Despite your opinion, it's not a good contract. Sutter is also a character guy, he'd also be a good 4th line or checking line center but doesn't provide enough offence or make the players around him better enough to justify his contract (being paid as a 2nd line center). He's had terrible injury luck and I hope he has a bounce back season, but he is overpaid by any metric. If we have smart cap people working for the team, there has been little evidence to prove this assertion. The Loui problem is not going to be solved by him retiring, that would be amazing but highly unlikely. He can still play but is overpaid by about 5 million. When you add up all the bad contracts it does not paint a rosy picture of this managements ability to assess pro talent and manage the salary cap. Nice try Alf but this managements strength has been drafting not cap management.
  15. I used capfriendly the whole time I did the research for the post. I'm not saying my numbers are 100% accurate; they are projections. You aren't taking into consideration the fact that capfriendly is only counting 15 players next year on the cap and only 7 the year after. That means they will have to sign 8 more players with that 2020-21 money, it may turn into a problem when Petterson, Hughes, Juolevi, etc all have their ELC's expire. More than that, the poor contracts on the books shorten their contention window as the prime ELC years of Petterson and Hughes will not be maximized. The cap rising could create some space but salaries also correspondingly rise. There is not oodles of cap space next season or the season after despite what you claim. I will give this management credit for drafting but they have done an objectively poor job at managing the cap and those who think otherwise are wearing their homer goggles. That being said, their mistakes (plus Gillis' Luongo penalty) will be over soon enough and the teams core should thrive. The point of the post was not to be overly negative about Eriksson, Beagle, Sutter, and other mistakes but to show that there is hope at the end of all this. That being said, if you aren't somewhat skeptical of this managements ability to manage a cap at this point, you haven't been paying close enough attention.