tyhee

With the Canucks o/t victory over San Jose on Nov 27 the Canucks are now pretty much what some of us expected going into the season-a bubble team that is good at forward and weak on defence-hence good offensively (5th of 32 league teams in goals per game, tops in the Pacific division) and poor defensively (30th out of 32 teams in goals against per game.) Now, obviously the normal ebb and flow of a season will make those figures go up and down but they're in the range of what we should expect from this team. The only really surprising thing overall is that the goaltending hasn't been better. The Canucks wouldn't be in the playoffs based on present standings (I'll assume pts% but it doesn't matter-there is no metric that has them in the playoffs today) but they are close and it wouldn't be at all unreasonable to expect they will spend at least part of the season in a playoff position. They aren't as bad as the start to the season indicated. They aren't as good as their record over the first seven games of the season would indicate nor as good as their record over the last five games would indicate. They are a team which is good enough to finish in the playoffs by a fairly small margin or out of the playoffs by a fairly small margin. Other finishes are possible but much less likely. So where do we go from here? That depends on what we want. We all want the team to win, but some emphasize the present, some the future, some in between. The fans that want to cheer for their team this year want them to continue to do as well this year as they can. Blowing up the team is out of the question. I think Canucks' Management is in that camp so that realistically we're not going to see much in the way of moves for the future at the cost of this season. Those who are incredibly frustrated by the last decade will want the team completely blown up. They want change and they want it now. Personally while frustrated over the recent past it seems to me that QUICKLY blowing up the team is more an emotional reaction than a logical one, but Those who want long-term success at the possible cost of continuing to be a playoff bubble team will want change. They don't want long term contracts likely to hurt the team in four or more years. They are the folks that wouldn't have considered extending Miller and are in favour of trading not only Horvat, but pretty much any player if the return is likely to be worth more in the long term than the long-term outlook for the player being traded. Similarly, they'll keep any player for which the long-term likely success is likely greater than the likely long-term success of whatever the return would be. This group will have some different outlooks, not only due to differences in opinions about the future of individual players but different ideas about what is long term and what is short term. t I can sympathize with all three groups. As is probably obvious from the above presentation I'm firmly in the third group so am not happy saying this but in reality, Canucks' ownership and management are firmly in the first group. While we'll see the odd individual move made for the future, the general approach is going to be to emphasize the present so we won't see the team is blown up or slowly retooled to give emphasis to the future. Those fans who cheer for the team to make the 2023 playoffs are in little danger of management decisions getting in their way.

I"m generally a bit less optimistic about where our d-men rate, but the most extreme disagreement I have is with regard to the guy at the bottom, Poolman. I know he's been better in the past, is rusty and might be better again in the future, but in preseason I didn't seem him as belonging on an NHL roster, including the Canucks' roster. I thought Wolanin outplayed him for a spot this preseason.

The reference to the plaintiff and to Khela making the application to freeze Rai's assets make it clear this is a civil case. Accordingly, Rai won't be going to jail as a result of this court case. If he is charged criminally and convicted of these allegations he'd expect to be facing a jail term. In addition, civil cases aren't tossed because they take too long to get to trial. They can be tossed if the plaintiff doesn't take any action for a long time, but not because there isn't enough court time so the date is set too far in the future.

In my dreams, Kuzmenko doesn't adjust quickly to the NHL so has a mediocre 2022-23 season resulting in him being affordable for the Canucks to extend, signs a Canuck extension for three years for something between cheap and reasonable, then blossoms starting his sophomore NHL season.

It isn't wrong to hope that, though the first part is highly unlikely. However, for the last four or five years of that contract we can look forward to it being an albatross and laugh at Treliving agreeing to pay Huberdeau for the Flames at age 37 based on what he accomplished for the Panthers in a career year at age 28.

The Blue Jackets' management might have gone by more than metrics, but you can't tell if that is what happened because Gudbranson's big pay increase this summer was in line with his vastly improved numbers. If his numbers last season reflected what one can expect from him in the future, he was due a big raise. The argument against Gudbranson's contract is actually that CBJ paid too much attention to the 2021-2022 metrics.

With the losses from the pandemic bringing an almost flat cap once again, with the likelihood of an almost flat cap for a couple more years, so many teams are up against the cap that there aren't many teams looking to sign players right now, As a result the market for wingers has pretty much dried up. Players aren't going to get what they'd expected. Motte likely went into Free Agent Frenzy expecting the range you indicated, $2.5-$3 million. In the present market he isn't getting it. The $1.4 million suggested by the original poster is very fair. I doubt the Canucks will sign Motte, though. They've already replaced him and would probably prefer to keep a little cap space (LTIR overage for Ferland, perhaps Poolman and possibly more depending on who is injured in preseason) in case they can acquire a defenceman.

My reaction is different from the original poster. I thought Wagner did a very good job of rating the prospects. If anything, I'd be very slightly less optimistic than Wagner was. FWIW, Klimovitch is perhaps the hardest to rate. I think Wagner did an excellent job of describing him-elite potential, incredibly unrefined and I'd be less diplomatic about his defensive zone play. Wagner said in the defensive zone he can "charitably be described as a work in progress", a descrption I considered exceptionally charitable. Still, with the young age and change in ice surface, language and culture it isn't unreasonably to have him in the 3rd tier. We should get a far better idea this coming season. I'd have placed Gardner and Zlodeev lower, in the 5th tier, but Silovs higher, in the 3rd. I believe Silovs' poor to mediocre AHL numbers last year were a direct result of the way he was used. After a couple of good starts with Abbotsford the club decided they had to give DiPietro a better chance (even though Silovs had been better in training camp and to start the season) and put Silovs on the back burner. When Abbotsford finally gave him the chance he'd deserved to play more earlier, it went poorly. I think that is completely understandable and have high expectations for him this season. I'd have placed Costmar, Malone and Persson in the 6th tier. After last season it is difficult to see Persson as anything other than the longest of long shots, only still in the pyramid at all because the Canucks still own his rights. Chances are he'll either be in the ECHL or back in Europe this season. Emotionally I still want to put Woo higher, in the 4th tier, but logically Wagner is probably right.

The argument against the Canucks trading for Miller is not now and never was that J.T. Miller the player wasn't worth the 2019 3rd rounder (71st overall) and 2020 1st rounder (20th overall) price. He clearly is and always was. It was a question of whether the Canucks were in a position to meaningfully benefit from acquiring Miller. Getting good player is of no benefit if it doesn't get the team meaningful success. So far having Miller has improved the Canucks enough to make the playoffs once. When they got there, first Markstrom, then Demko when Markstrom was hurt, provided sensational goaltending to drag the team into the second round. If getting closer to the playoffs and making them once was viewed as a worthwhile goal, then getting a good player for immediate help at the expense of giving up one good chance and one lesser chance for players for the future under several years of cost control made a lot of sense. If on the other hand the team had a goal to be actually good enough to compete for a Cup, then adding Miller was at the time misguided and so far has been a dismal failure. It would have been far better to have those chances for good players for the future-even though it is unlikely they'd have gotten a player as good as Miller has turned out to be for them. Of course, if the Canucks can trade Miller now and recoup the value they gave up for him, then the acquisition of Miller will have been a success-they'll have gotten the value of Miller for the time they've had him and still get those chances for the future. Those fans who want their team to be better immediately whatever level the team is at will feel the trade was a good one. I respect their feelings, but don't share them. I was never someone who wanted to see the Canucks emphasize the short term over the long term, so unless the Canucks in a trade recoup the value they gave up for Miller, I consider that despite Miller being everything we could have hoped for and more, the trade will have been a mistake. (Some will note that I've oversimplified the timing issue, but I don't want to get into more complications.)

I know this is the JTM thread, but since someone suggested trading Demko, it is an intriguing idea. I don't think it would be likely to work but my reasoning is very different. 1. Demko being an excellent goaltender should not in and of itself be a reason to refuse to move him, the same as it shouldn't be for any player. Of course, the better the player the more the team would have to get in return to consider moving him. In Demko's case it would obviously have to be a great haul coming back. 2. It seems to me that the return for trading goaltenders is lower than it was a few seasons ago, just as it is less common to see goalies as mid to high first round picks. 3. The most intriguing of your points is goalies being excellent well into their thirties. I don't think there is much doubt that was the case not all that many years ago. I haven't done a study on it, but wonder if the way goalies play the game now has changed that, at least partly due to the amount of time goalies now seem to spend in the butterfly. When we look at this past season, the oldest goalies who were starters and whose play might be termed excellent were 32 years old-Frederik Andersen and Jacob Markstrom. Darcy Kuemper was 31. In my view no other starting NHL goaltender in 2021-2022 who was 31 years of age or more had an excellent season and many now carry contracts that are a waste of cap space or of the owners' or insurers' money. (Imo, while it could theoretically happen it would be truly exceptional if a goalie had an excellent season not to place in the top 12 in Goals Saved Against Average.) I haven't looked at the matter in enough detail to say with any certainty, but I wonder if the days of goalies being regularly really good into their mid-30's are gone, to the extent that it will be truly unusual to find a goalie playing excellently in his mid-30's.

I agree completely with your post. There are of course exceptions, generally as you say where a player has shown marked improvement, but one has to be aware that in most cases in which a player is available for free, that will turn out to be what he is worth in the NHL. Of course with Old Mother Hubbard's cupboard, virtually devoid of prospects, the team might as well take a flyer on someone who appears to have the potential to grow into someone that can contribute at the NHL level so long as they have extra contract slots available. On another tack, Joacim "Player Name" gives us one of the great demonstrations of how stats can be very odd when the sample size is small. He appeared for 36 minutes for the Canucks, giving up 6 goals for a 10.00 GAA.

People seem to be missing the third paragraph, which is in < brackets>, which says specifically it is tongue in cheek, as well as the way the first paragraph wording is taken almost exactly from the original post.

So, I went ahead and reviewed each and every one of GMJB’s free agent signings as a Canuck. Contrary to what many of you have been saying, he won far more signings than he lost. In fact the way I’m looking at it, he was a winner in 46 signings and drew 19 of them. Have a look yourself ... <Note: I have to admit the original post was the funniest thing I’d read in a long while. This post is firmly tongue in cheek, but I really did think the position in the original post was more than a bit of a stretch. Please don’t bother to post that the comments and judgments are nonsense. It won’t be a surprise.> Date Player W/L/D Comments 2014-07-01 Bobby Sanguinetti W Solid player on the Calder Cup finalist Utica Comets 2014-07-01 Ryan Miller W 3 year Canucks starting goaltender 2014-07-02 Cal O’Reilly W Another important piece of the 2015 Comets 2015-03-14 Ashton Sautner W Has been a depth defenceman for the Canucks 2015-07-01 Matt Bartkowski W Played 80 games for the Canucks in the season he was under contract and his mother provided great entertainment. 2015-07-01 Richard Bachman W Intended mostly for Utica, also filled in for 7 games with the Canucks 2015-07-01 Taylor Fedun W depth piece for the Canucks and solid contributor in Utica 2015-07-03 Blair Jones D didn’t play much in the organization but didn’t cost anything 2016-01-19 Michael Zalewski W formerly on AHL contract, he was signed to a spc as the Canucks needed an injury replacement-got into several games with the Canucks 2016-04-13 Troy Stecher W played 4 seasons for the Canucks 2016-04-29 Michael Garteig D played mostly in the ECHL but didn’t cost any assets 2016-05-16 Yan-Pavel Laplante D 3 year contract, only played 18 AHL games but didn’t cost any assets 2016-05-26 Tom Nilsson D Former 4th round draft pick, played 17 games for the Comets 2016-07-01 Borna Rendulic W in his year in the organization, showed skill with the Comets, seemed a solid prospect and filled in a game with the Canucks before returning to Europe 2016-07-01 Michael Chaput W Intended mostly for depth, actually played 77 games over 2 seasons with the Canucks and, together with Jayson Megna, provided fodder for deployment puzzles about Canucks coach Willie D 2016-07-01 Chad Billins D regular with the Comets for a year before returning to Europe 2016-07-01 Jayson Megna W As Chaput, expected to play mostly for Utica but got into 59 Canucks games, providing entertainment while people tried to puzzle out what he must have had on WD 2016-07-01 Loui Player Name W As he was part of the trade for Connor Garland, which has already been established as a win, this signing has to be a win as well 2016-07-15 Michael Carcone W traded for Josh Leivo who was a solid contributor for the Canucks 2016-10-13 Jack Skille W played 55 games for the 2016-17 Canucks 2017-03-03 Zack MacEwen W provided offence in the AHL and grit for the Canucks before being lost on waivers 2017-03-12 Drew Shore D played 14 games for the Canucks before his contrast was terminated and he left for Europe 2017-03-13 Jalen Chatfield W as depth, played 18 games for the Canucks and 3 seasons for the Comets before leaving as an unrestricted free agent 2017-03-28 Griffen Molino D played 46 AHL and 5 NHL games before leaving to sign a minor league contract with the Toronto Marlies 2017-05-26 Philip Holm W traded for Brandon Leipsic, who played 31 Canucks games before being on lost on waivers to the Kings when the Canucks tried to clear him for the minors to trade him for Josh Leivo 2017-07-01 Alexander Burmistrov W provided depth, filling in for 24 games for the Canucks before his contract was terminated so he could return to Russia 2017-07-01 Anders Nilsson W Nilsson backed up Jacob Markstrom for a season and a half before being included in the trade (previously determined to be a win) bringing Arturs Silovs to the Canucks organization 2017-07-01 Michael del Zotto W played 105 games for the Canucks before being included in the trade (previously determined to be a win) that brought Luke Schenn to the Canucks for 18 games, before Schenn left in free agency 2017-07-01 Patrick Wiercoch D Wiercoch played for the Comets for a season before leaving for Europe 2017-07-01 Sam Gagner W Gagner played a season for the Canucks before helping the Toronto Marlies AHL team and then being included in the trade, previously determined to be a win, for Ryan Spooner 2017-07-14 Jaime Sifers D Sifers played 2 seasons for Utica before retiring 2017-09-01 Tomas Vanek W played well for the Canucks, traded for Tyler Motte 2018-02-07 Darren Archibald W had been on a minor league contract. Provided depth for the Canucks before being included in the trade (previously determined to be a winner) bringing Arturs Silovs to the Canucks organization. 2018-07-01 Antoine Roussel W played parts of 3 seasons for the Canucks before being included in trade (previously determined to be a winner) for OEL and Garland 2018-07-01 Jay Beagle W played parts of 3 seasons for the Canucks before being included in trade (previously determined to be a winner) for OEL and Garland 2018-07-01 Tim Schaller W played parts of 2 seasons for the Canucks before being included in trade (previously determined to be a winner) for Tyler Toffoli 2018-12-15 Mitch Eliot D played parts of 2 seasons for the Comets and ECHL Wings, but there was no acquisition cost 2019-02-19 Michael Leighton W provided goalie depth for the organization so that there was no further risk of junior Michael di Pietro being called up on an emergency basis 2019-03-12 Josh Teves D provided AHL depth for 2 seasons. No acquisition cost. 2019-04-01 Brogan Rafferty W Rafferty provided solid offence in the AHL and was considered a good prospect before signing as a free agent with the Ducks 2019-04-01 Jake Kielly D played 24 ECHL and 9 AHL games over 2 seasons 2019-07-01 Jordie Benn W provided depth for the Canucks before being included in trade (previously determined to be a winner) that brought prospect Connor Lockhart to the organization 2019-07-01 Oscar Fantenberg W provided NHL depth, playing 36 games for the Canucks before leaving to play in the KHL 2019-07-01 Tyler Graovac W depth piece for the Canucks for 2 seasons 2019-07-01 Tyler Myers W After being 3rd in average time on ice for Canuck defencemen his first season in Vancouver, Myers has been the 2nd most relied upon d-man the past 2 seasons, averaging more than 22 minutes a game 2019-07-01 Zane McIntyre D traded for Louis Domingue, who provided depth for the Canucks 2019-07-04 Justin Bailey W depth and good prospect for the Canucks 2019-07-10 Michael Ferland D long term injured. No acquisition cost 2020-03-19 Marc Michaelis W Intended as a prospect or AHL player, actually played 15 games for the Canucks 2020-10-09 Braden Holtby D provided security of an experienced top-flight NHL goalie for 1 season for the Canucks before being bought out. No acquisition cost and only $500K against the cap in 2021-22. 2020-10-19 Jace Hawryluk W depth piece for the Canucks in 2020-21 2021-07-28 Brad Hunt W Expected to split time between Vancouver and Abbotsford, has been with the Canucks all season 2021-07-28 Brady Keeper D Has been injured this season but has another season on his contract. 2021-07-28 Devante Stephens W As expected, playing for Abbotsford 2021-07-28 Jaroslav Halak W As with Braden Holtby last season, provides Canucks with the security of an experienced backup. So far not on pace to reach his save % bonus which if it continues could save $250K off next year’s salary cap. 2021-07-28 John Stevens D Formerly on a minor league contract, since signing a spc has become a regular with the AHL Canucks 2021-07-28 Justin Dowling D split time between Vancouver and Abbotsford 2021-07-28 Kyle Burroughs W Expected to be a depth player, has surprisingly spent the entire season with the Canucks and played fairly regularly. 2021-07-28 Luke Schenn W Has been a solid regular this season 2021-07-28 Nic Petan W has been solid for Abbotsford 2021-07-28 Phillip di Giuseppe W has been solid for Abbotsford 2021-07-28 Sheldon Dries W is among the AHL goal scoring leaders 2021-07-28 Sheldon Rempal W 2nd on the AHL Canucks in scoring, > 1 ppg 2021-07-28 Tucker Poolman D regular on the Canucks but not as good as hoped 2021-10-12 Alex Chiasson W Training camp pto has, surprisingly, become a regular for the Canucks this season. There you have it. 46 wins and 19 draws, to go with the stellar trading record indicated in the original post on this thread and Benning’s well known drafting prowess shows that without a doubt, the naysayers are wrong. Benning did well-clearly well enough that his team would have eventually been a contender.

Of course, Pederson will come on like gangbusters and I'll be proven wrong, but no. Against claiming him: 1. With the new management group talking about looking at NCAA and European free agents, which generally become available in the spring, there are very likely going to be chances to sign players with higher likelihood of becoming NHL players; 2. With the possibility of trades coming which could involve trading quality players with more pieces coming back than going out, as well as the new management group speaking of looking for European and NCAA free agents (who typically become available in the spring), there is a good reason to hold onto the three available contract slots. (There are 47 contracts with a limit of 50.) 3. When a team claims a player on waivers, they have to keep the player on the NHL roster unless they waive the player and he clears waivers. Therefore there is really little point to claiming someone just to waive him again and try to send him to the minors unless the scouts are very high on his potential-not just to be a depth forward but higher up the linup. The main exception to that is when the team has a current need, usually due to midseason injuries. The team doesn't have a need for another depth forward right now. It is unlikely he'd make the team this season so would be slated to go to the minors after being put on waivers again. He's never shown anything to make one think he has a high chance of being a solid NHL player-if he makes it, he'll more likely be a depth forward. 4. The team already has some players who have played well enough to deserve a callup. I'd much rather see them reward the guys who have played well for Abbotsford than leave them without a shot, feeling hard done by, unless Pederson is extremely likely to be an upgrade.

But ... it will cost more than $6 million.

Right now it certainly appears Hughes is Benning's best acquisition, but not his last. Since the Hughes signing Benning traded for Lammikko and Juulsen and signed Alex Chiasson as a free agent.

In the Bettman NHL this is accurate. Of course, to get there, the NHL counts broken ties as either wins or ties. There are no losses and no track in the standings of OTW, just OTL. A Bettman .500 team is a below average team. If you count consistently, so that losses are losses instead of ties, then you get a more realistic figure, 9 games below .500. Similarly, if you count ot and shootout wins and losses all as ties, you get a record of 5-14-4, 9 games under .500.

In their first 15 games as you point out slightly differently, the Canucks won 9 and lost 6. If they were to beat the teams that finished the schedule behind them and lose to the teams that finished ahead of them, they'd have won 8 and lost 7. They started the season well, but they did have a relatively easy schedule to start the season and that was one of hte factors in their good start. In January, 2020 the Canucks won 8 and lost 3. In four of those eight wins their skaters were clearly outplayed and the wins were atributable to Jacob Markstrom. As against that, one of the losses was attributable to a great game by Connor Hellebuyck. Jan 4 they beat NYR 2-1 behind Markstrom stopping 36 of 37 shots. Georgiev stopped 25 of 27 for the Rangers but Markstrom was the difference with his team being outshot. Jan 16 they beat Arizona 3-1 despite being outshot 35-25. Markstrom was the difference again in this one, stopping 34 of 35. Jan 27 they beat the Blues 3-1 with one goal into the empty net. Jake Allen was good in goal for the Blues, stopping 23 of 25, but Markstrom pulled another of his other-worldly performances stopping 36 of 37 to enable his outplayed and outshot team to record the win. Jan 29 they beat the Sharks 5-2 despite being outshot 40-25. Martin Jones didn’t have a good game, stopping 20 of 24. Markstrom was again excellent, stopping 38 of 40 shots to be the difference maker in the game. Clearly not all their wins that month were due to Markstrom, but half of them were. One of the losses was due to goaltending-on January 14 the Jets Connor Hellebuyck pulled off a 41 save shutout while Markstrom stopped 21 of 24. Ok, that makes 4 wins and 1 loss due to goaltending. Take that 8-3 record and change those 5 results and the team’s record for the month would have been 5-6. Of course, goaltenders are part of the team, too. Notwithstanding that, there is good reason to argue that goaltending made the Canucks record look better than the team was capable of sustaining that month. Boxscores for those games can be found on hockey-reference.com Canucks page for the 2019-20 season, going to schedule and results and clicking on the dates of the games. btw, your saying "despite the Canucks racing out to leads in almost every one of those games has nothing to do with whether the goaltender was the difference maker. In the four games games in which Markstrom was the difference maker, the opposition scored first three of the four games and in the other, the score was tied 1-1 at the end of the first period and at the end of the second period. Why pick 3 games, an extremely small sample, to see how the team was doing. Let's take 7 games (lost 5 of 7), or 11 games (lost 7 of 11) or 17 games (lost 11 of 17). You admit they were slumping-but that slump had lasted six weeks. The fact is the team simply wasn't that good. There is no reason it can't be both. Money spent on less skilled players isn't available to be spent on the higher end players that make the bigger difference. It is a matter of team construction. You have a point here. Goalies are part of the team. On the other hand, hot goaltending often carries a team in the short term while in the long term it is helpful but not sustainable. That's why you see goalies making a huge difference more often in the playoffs than in the regular season-the playoffs are shorter and the goalie doesn't have to stay hot as long. I invite you to go through the game records and demonstrate what you were saying. I've already pointed out that in the four games Markstrom pulled out for them in the month of January the opposition scored first in the three of them and spent most of the fourth game in a 1-1 tie. First Markstrom, then Demko, were absolutely incredible in the 2020 playoffs. It was enough to get them past the Blues even the skaters were outplayed. It wasn't enough to get them past the Golden Knights, whose territorial margin over the Canucks was huge-and the Golden Knights were winning the majority of those games. In that series against the Golden Knights the shots on goal, if I added correctly, were 273 for the Golden Knights and 169 for the Canucks. Those who support Benning call those who don't haters. The simple fact is though that well managed teams don't lose that much for so many seasons while trying each and every season to make the playoffs. After a reasonable time period to make changes, good management and bad management will diverge.

This is something I was wondering a few games ago, but with the Canucks coming off two games in which they showed really good effort, outshooting their opponents by a combined 79-58 and only losing one of them because of an outstanding goaltending performance by John Gibson, this seems to be a strange time to ask this question. Generally teams whose coaches have lost the room aren't outworking and outshooting their opponents. Now if you were to ask again a week from now ...

Also Nashville.

Perhaps Arizona's training camp was, relatively, a country club and the two Arizona vets weren't prepared to get (Travis) Green in the Gills.

If the callups are viewed as injury replacements who are expected to be #7 and sit out unless there is another injury, it makes sense. Prospects should be getting game action to develop. Brisebois came up and sat and is now being sent back to Utica to get game action while Chatfield takes a turn mostly sitting. Rafferty may get his turn as well but being newer to the professional game and apparently their best defensive prospect in Utica, the Canucks may want him getting continued game action. Leaving Breezy in Vancouver for long periods of time to sit and sit and sit would only make sense if they'd given up on him as a prospect. In addition as has been mentioned if Stecher is a likely sitout they might have chosen to have the # 7 d-man be a right handed shot.

On the other hand ... 1. In any one game the Comets can dress a maximum of 6 skaters with over 260 regular games in the NHL, AHL and European elite leagues, at least one of whom must have no more than 320 accumulated games. The Comets will end up sitting some of their veterans. Over 320 games: Baertschi, Bancks, Biega, Boucher, Camper, Graovac, Hamilton Over 260 games: Bailey, Goldobin At least three of those have to sit out every game. 2. I'd be shocked if Biega spends much of the season with the Comets. The Canucks don't make it through a season with only seven (or for that matter eight) defencemen and as soon as there is an injury Biega will be called up-if he actually makes it to Utica at all. Last season he also got waived and loaned to Utica-for 3 games. There's no reason to think it will be much longer this season. 3. Outside of Biega, the Comets defence is exceptionally inexperienced. Biega is the only one who even reaches the "veteran exempt" limit of 260 games and as mentioned above I don't think he'll be staying. Sautner, who provides virtually no offence but is ok defensively, has 201 accumulated games, less than three full seasons in his four seasons as a pro. Brisebois has 125 accumulated games over two seasons. The most experienced outside of Biega is Dylan Blujus, who isn't on an NHL contract but rather is heading into his third season on an AHL deal, with 239 accumulated games. None of the three is much of an offensive threat nor is any one of the three a clear #1 at the AHL level. All three are ok and both Sautner and Brisebois have had brief appearances in the NHL and will almost certainly get some more this season. Jalen Chatfield regressed during an injury plagued 2018-19 season and wasn't effective in training camp this season. In 2017-18 he'd appeared to be reasonable defensively, though his offence is about as non-existent as it gets in the pro ranks. He has 94 accumulated games. Of the three signed as rookies late last season, Eliot and Teves appear to have quite a ways to go to learn the AHL game, while Rafferty may not be quite so far away. Juolevi has a long way to develop defensively and physically. I'd expect the Comets defence to struggle with early season growing pains and that the coaching staff has a lot of work to do there. It's an inexperienced group which may be hurt by the lack of a long-term solid veteran. Goaltending of course can't be as bad as last season when Demko was only around for 16 games, Leighton for 19 and the Comets went through five other goalies all of whom struggled. Presumably Graovac and Camper will be the top 2 centers while healthy. After that come Bancks and Hamilton, though Bancks is nominally a very low scoring winger. I'm not sure they have anyone else, other than MacEwen who I believe last played center in junior hockey. The Comets in their preseason (only 2 games at the AHL level) were experimenting with Jasek at center and if he works out the Comets could be decent at center while everyone remains healthy. The guys the Comets signed and assigned to Kalamazoo aren't likely to provide much help. 4. It isn't just Biega that I don't expect to see stay in Utica very long. There will be injuries and it would be surprising to see Baertschi stay with the Comets for long and there will likely be others as well. Last year quite a few people were really excited about the Comets. They tied for 25th in the league in pts %. I hope things come together for them-the fans in Utica certainly deserve it-and there may be some encouraging signs in the early season with Baertschi, Goldobin and Biega (assuming all of them get there-but there are still reasons for concern.

Otoh, if the 2016-17 season hadn't been burned, Boeser's entry level contract would be in effect for the 2019-20 season and he'd be at training camp. The issue would arise next summer.

Since the TSN coverage will be about what moves the Leafs might make so that they'll be able to buy what they need at the deadline, it won't affect this poll anyway.