• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by vannuck59

  1. 4 hours ago, spur1 said:

    LE will get his chance in training camp to make the team. Same as everyone else. I still see LE as a good depth player. (Overpaid one) He just needs to embrace his new role as his old role has passed him by. 


    True enough LE will get his chance. I wouldn't hold my breath though on him making the team. 

  2. 17 hours ago, BCNeil said:

    Our major problem last year was scoring especially from our defence.  Canucks scored 225 goals 26th in the league.  Our defense combined for 135 points.

    The 3 playoff teams defences in our division scored...Calgary 198...SJ 221...and Vegas 162.  

    The significant changes from last year are.....Guddy, Hutton, and Pouliot out.  With their combined 40 points.

    Myers, Benn, and Hughes are the main additions.  They should easily be able to get those 40 points.  In fact these 3 should be about to double that.

    With better health for Edler and Tanev.  No reason the defence can't give us 50 more points, from 135-185. 


    Offence, major changes are Miller and Ferland in.  Granlund and probably LE out, with their 51 total points.  Hopefully Miller and Ferland can total closer to 90.

    Along with most of the forwards still improving with age.  90 more points, 50 from the defence, 40 from forwards. this season is not crazy.  That would be about 35 goals.  Moving from 225-260 goes from 26th to 10th.

    That takes the teams goal differential from -29 to +6


    We gave up 254 goals.  20th in the league.  Myers and Benn should help there, along with more games from Edler and Tanev.  Giving up just 15 less goals the team goes from 20th to 14th.  With a goal differential of +21.  That would put us 14th in the league and certainly in the playoff mix.  

    Well done, I see the same outcome All we are missing is one more Dman get rid of Stecher and replace with a bigger Dman that can score .Out Eriksson play the kids.

  3. 20 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

     I have just been thinking about the Seattle expansion draft and who we will protect at that time...………….


    I get that, anchoring ourselves to any one player, 2 years prior, may be a little premature , but I wonder about some of the comments I have read


    on CDC about which goaltender we may protect...……..


    My problem comes from the statement by some that Markstrom may be the goaltender protected at that time...……….I really have a hard time with that position


    1st of all, all things being equal. Markstrom, is at best an average goaltender, who has been such for 1 year...…..a very small sample size


    2ndly, Demko, has shown he is a NHL goaltender, albeit a small sample size, but given everything else is equal, age must be a issue that is weighed very carefully


    Demko, is a goaltender of the future, Markstrom of the present, I would question whether Markstrom has 5 more years in the league in total, strictly on age alone.


    One never knows, but it is the norm, and I would not be wanting to bet on our future, if our money is on Markstrom playing longer than that


    I personally, would risk not putting Markstrom on the protective list, if we decide not to trade him, which I honestly do not think Benning will do.


    Lastly, how will Markstrom's contract demands come into play with all the young gun contracts coming up? What will Markstrom's new contract be worth and for how long?


    It will be interesting to see who is not protected from the Canucks and around the league. We definitely will loose someone of value, the question will be who?


    If we look back at the Vegas expansion draft, Pittsburgh let Fleury go, which I am sure was painful, but was probably the right thing to do, long term


    I think this is a no brainer for us.


    My question is, what other Goalies are exposed, that would give Seattle, strength and depth...…..what other players from the exposed Canucks may be more enticing?


    My second question is, if you would protect Demko, then would you trade Markstrom at the TDL this year, as his contract is up at the end of the year...….


    Are we prepared to give Markstrom a 5 year, $5.5 million per year contract, with a NTC...………...because if he plays well, that is what he will want, IMO


    Your thoughts?

    Jim is better off trading Markstrom this year loading up at the draft hey you can always resign him in the off  season if you want. 

  4. On ‎7‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 9:32 PM, RowdyCanuck said:

    I agree but i look at teams that have produced them and they had guys like Miller and ferland for vets. Just like when DD played Jake played bigger and we all have seen what rooster been able to do for Jake and helped Jake find another gear and he became a bigger pest. I think now we have a culture and the vets to help the other young guys that play with an edge thrive. 

    Jake is not a power forward and never will be. He threw his weight around in junior got to the nhl and disappeared .

  5. On ‎7‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 9:40 AM, Hindustan Smyl said:

    [proposal] Canucks should consider trading Tanev and signing Gardiner


    While I've been happy with the moves that the Canucks have made this off-season, our defense in the long term still concerns me.    


    Here is what our defense looks like right now:









    Short term concerns:


    While that defense isn't too bad, I still have concerns for that left side.  If Edler goes down with injury (and perhaps I shouldn't be saying, "if,"........I should be saying, "when,"), you'll either have.....


    1) A very young Quinn Hughes playing on the top pairing  OR

    2) An honest yet talent-challenged 3rd pairing caliber dman in Jamie Benn moving up to fulfill that role.


    In both cases, I think there are significant risks involved in having either of those men playing on the top pairing for any length of time.......and if the Canucks have playoff aspirations, and Edler injury could once again prove to be fatal.



    Long term concerns:


    One major concern I have for our defense long term, is the lack of Top 4 caliber defensemen in our system.       Two years from now, the Canucks will be faced with the following dilemna:


    1) Do we re-sign 35 year old Alexander Edler?  If so, for how much?    As I addressed in another thread, will we have enough cap space to re-up Edler, given that Hughes and Pettersson will need to be re-upped at this same time?

    2) IF Hughes is ready to assume that top pairing position on the team, who takes that 2nd pairing LD?    Is Olli Juolevi projecting to be a 2nd pairing defenseman as of this writing?    Can Tryamkin fulfill that role?     











    Hughes-[Tryamkin? (as a Tanev replacement)]








    My only problem with the above, is that we might be assuming too much..........and that we might be making unrealistic projections.


    While it's nice to make assumptions that guys like Juolevi, Tryamkin, and Woo will easily be able to fill those Top 4 positional voids, I'm just not sure if they'll be able to be GREAT in those roles.   Are any of those guys projecting to be GREAT 2nd pairing dmen at the NHL level?   I'm not so sure.      


    On top of all that, I'm also assuming that Hughes will automatically become a top pairing calibre dman.       Although it seems likely, it's by no means a guarantee.    


    Gardiner would not only solidify the left side D both short term and long term, but would also allow the Canucks to make more realistic long term and conservative projections on their D: 


    This is where I think a guy like Gardiner will come in handy.    The presence of Gardiner will allow the Canucks to:


    1) Have more top pairing LD options if/when Edler gets injured.   Now, instead of relying on a very young Quinn Hughes, or the 3rd pairing calibre Jamie Benn, the Canucks could easily put Gardiner as an adequate top pairing replacement, while still allowing Hughes to develop his game on a 2nd pairing.






    [If Edler gets injured]






    2) Let Edler walk after two years without having to worry if the Canucks will be deep enough:     If Hughes is good enough to assume Top pairing D at this point, great!  Stick him on the top pairing.  If he's not ready.......great!   Gardiner goes there.    For the purposes of conservatism, you can then make preliminary projections to have guys like Juolevi, Tryamkin, and Woo taking over those 3rd pairing positions instead of making "lofty" 2nd pairing forecasts:








    3) Will the presence of Gardiner affect the development of Hughes?       


    I think this is the biggest reservations that many people have (including Benning), with regards to signing Gardiner.     I'm of the opinion that it wouldn't for the following reasons:


    A)    Even if Hughes plays on the 3rd pairing 5  on 5, you could still give Hughes boatloads of PP time.        

    B-)  As mentioned earlier, injuries to the D are inevitable.  Hughes would likely start on the 3rd pairing, but would likely get significant minutes in a top 4 role due to inevitable injuries.   Significant minutes on the Top 4 would be great for Hughes' development.    You know what likely wouldn't be great for his development right now?   Getting significant minutes in a top 2 role (which is basically what would happen right now if injuries occurred to the D).    

    C)    If Hughes proves to be a Top 4 calibre dman right from the get go, move one of Edler or Gardiner to the right side.   Plain and simple.    Gardiner has had extensive experience playing on the right side in Toronto, while Edler played on the right side with Erhoff back in 2011.   









    Long term cap ramifications:   


    I don't want to speculate about the long term cap ramifications of simultaneously trading Tanev (for a pick) while signing Gardiner (my guess is that Gardiner would be had for 6 million), and so the extra cap hit we'd take on would be (6 - 4.45 = 1.55 million), but I think it would definitely be worth exploring on Benning's end.    Again - I have no idea if the Canucks would be able to afford this move in the long term.    I speculated enough in my other thread and so I want re-hash that over here.




    Bringing in Gardiner would solidify the Canucks' left side D both short term and long term.    We wouldn't be forced to overburden Quinn Hughes, and we could also make more realistic and conservative projections with regards to guys like Tryamkin, Juolevi, and Woo.   Canucks D would be absolutely set both short term and long term on that left side.


  6. 12 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

    Maybe it’s just me, but does that 3rd line not look too weak to you?  Even if you replaced Gaudette with Sutter, my concern is that a 3rd line that would have difficult scoring goals. 

    Why do you think that ,you think Baertschi and Virtanen cant score? or is it that you think Sutter's useless 

  7. 22 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

    Green should consider staying away from any line combination involving Gaudette, Baertschi, Virtanen, Sutter, Eriksson, and Leivo.   Random thought on Quinn Hughes.


    The Canucks seem to have really improved their Top 6 this year.  A lot.   


    However, here is what I think:  


    1) I think any 3 man line combination involving Gaudette, Baertschi, Virtanen, Sutter, Eriksson, and Leivo will likely result in a very weak 3rd line in my the point where we’d get minimal bottom 6 production and would overburden our Top 6.


    2) Atleast TWO of the following THREE players should play on the 3rd line:   Pearson, Miller, Ferland.  That way, we can ensure that we’d be able to get some production from the 3rd line and present a more balanced attack.


    I feel like most “Armchair GM’s” on here have created the following line combinations:


    [Ferland or Miller]-Pettersson-Boeser

    Pearson-Horvat-[Ferland or Miller]


    That’s all fine and dandy, but I think that would leave our 3rd line being too weak no matter what combination.  Even one of Ferland/Pearson/Miller likely wouldn’t be able to carry such a line.


    That’s why, I would go with the following:


    Line 1:  Miller-Pettersson-Boeser


    I would put Miller here instead of Ferland since Miller is a better overall player.  In order to go “tit for tat” with other elite lines, the Canucks will need to put their best foot forward here.  This line wouldn’t be as good as the WCE or Sedin/Burrows, but I wouldn’t expect it to be too far off either.  This should be a very good line.


    Line 2:  [Eriksson or Baertschi]-Horvat-Virtanen


    These guys have had very good chemistry with one another in the past.  Baertschi has always been at his best with Horvat, while the entire Baertschi-Horvat-Virtanen line looked really good during the 2015 pre-season.  I’d easily try this again.  However - if the Canucks find it impossible to move Eriksson (without retaining or without adding a sweetener), then I’d trade Baertschi for a pick to clear cap space.  Give Eriksson one year to play alongside Horvat and increase his value.    


    3). Pearson-[Sutter or Gaudette]-Ferland


    Regardless of which Center the Canucks go with here, I think the duo presence of Pearson and Ferland would make this line a scoring threat........which would allow the Canucks to have three potentially good scoring lines.   I think only one of Pearson or Ferland here wouldn’t be enough to carry a 3rd line.  Two of these guys however, and I think we’d be into something:


    2) Coaching and Management expectations of Quinn Hughes:  


    After looking at our overall defense, I have come to the following conclusion:   Our management REALLY thinks that we have something special in Hughes.....:and not only will it not take long for Hughes to get up to speed, but that he might be a Zack Werenski-ish caliber player almost right from the get go (maybe by the time December hits).  


    The reason why I say this is because if management didn’t feel this way, I don’t think they would have Hughes slated into that 2nd pairing role right away.   My guess is that management not only expects Hughes to be a good 2nd pairing dman almost immediately, but also expects Hughes to be able to fill in quite easily on the top pairing Incase of injuries.     


    Now normally, I’d be critical of management’s thinking here, but they’ve earned the right to earn my trust.  Why?  Because - last year around this time, it also appeared to me that they were expecting too much out of Elias Pettersson.  One year ago - I was wondering if EP could handle the physical rigors of the NHL right away.......and found it risky that management had him pegged to play as a Center right away instead of starting out on the wing...........and boy was I WRONG.  Big time.   EP absolutely smashed the doors down and I couldn’t be happier.   My guess is that Managament is expecting Hughes to be Pettersson/Boeser-ish in terms of not needing much of a break-in period.   I remain skeptical, but management has earned my trust.   There is also a piece on Team 1040 (can’t remember who) Where one hockey pundit thinks that Hughes will be a Norris Trophy Candidate one day and has him currently ranked ahead of Makar.    Taking all of this into consideration, I am cautiously optimistic.

    As soon as I browsed threw your post I rolled my eyes Ferland and Miller were not brought in to play on the third line. period. Ferland will likely play with Pettersson and Boeser  , Miller will Play with  Horvat and Pearson . A third Line of Baertschi Sutter and Leivo / Virtanen (the third line will drive play) A forth  line of Ericsson Beagle and Leivo / Virtanen, the days of shut down lines are coming to a end four balanced lines that can score is the trend. with your better players in the top 6.

    • Upvote 1

  8. Just now, 48MPHSlapShot said:

    I dunno. Kinda seems like a piece we already have in Jett Woo. I think I'd rather hold onto Virtanen and either see how far we can develop him or use him as a piece in a deal for a legit first pairing right handed Dman.

    True but did you read 6 foot 5 a mobile puck moving D man that shoots right and is projected to # 2 Dman

  9. 20 hours ago, Alflives said:

    And that one million in cap savings gets paid out to whomever (Big Mac?) who takes his spot, so the cap is a wash.  Someone mentioned Loui only gets 1.5 million in actual dollars this season, because of previously paid bonus money.  So Aquilini has actually paid the guy for this year in advance.  I think that makes it easier to send Loui to Utica.  And Loui will not accept that.  He doesn’t want that embarrassment.  IMO, this whole issue ends with Loui retiring.  

    I'm with you Alf you could lend him to Europe its the same as sending him down to Utica you still get about the same cap relief 

  10. On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 5:31 PM, 48MPHSlapShot said:

    I love the Ferland signing, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the rebuild, unless we move him for a pick or prospect down the line, which is entirely likely.


    We still need to find our top pairing right pairing D to play with Hughes for the next decade or so. After that, yeah, I'll say the rebuild is over. 

    One trade P Myers out of Phili  Trade Virtanen and Eliot for him . Done

  11. On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 2:33 PM, Alain Vigneault said:

    And for anybody questioning my 3 decent player argument, use your heads and think about it.


    Out of the bunch, Horvat is far and away the most reliably good player, no complaints there.  To date, Pettersson and Hughes have less than 90 games between them.  Hardly proven even if the future looks highly promising for both.  And when Boeser isn't scoring, he's useless on the ice.  Luckily for us, he scores pretty often so it compensates nicely in his favour.


    Everybody else on the team are trenders, tweeners, and sidepieces.  Hardly a bunch of players that you couldn't easily find a replacement for.

    Boeser's job is to score  as for the rest of the group  Pettersson on a redraft would go # 1 . Hughes 50 point D man , this year. the rest of the supporting cast would match up to a lot teams. Trenders, LOL this how you build a winner unless you are in love with Toronto or Tampa both are high end high skilled teams look where that got them in the playoffs. Its fine to win 60 games but in the Playoffs it about playing the right way and to play heavy. Skill helps but its how much fight the team has in them. Pettersson is high end skill , Horvat brings everything a coach could ask for, The team is very close. One more top 2 Dman and I would say look out

    • Upvote 3

  12. On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 12:45 PM, D-Money said:

    Agree with this.


    Although the team has taken a step forward on the roster, they need to continue to accumulate picks/prospects. Ideally, we won't need to trade them for roster help going forward.


    I think with the lack of D depth in the system, they should continue to stock via the NCAA/euro route. Rafferty and Teves were a nice start, but I would have liked for them to also go for a more offensive puck-moving D, such as Oliwer Kaski (signed by Detroit), or Tony Sund (signed by San Jose). And with no D from this past draft, they should be the priorityI think you will see  in 2020.

    I think you will see more D picked next year.  we should be a bubble team we are two good D away from being a contender for the play offs 

    • Like 1

  13. On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 11:56 AM, PrinceGeorgeGoon said:

    I'm curious to see what Jim does with Boeser, I'm worried were going to lose him. 

    Also how will he move out a contract or two? We played pretty heavily for Miller given how Tampa was handcuffed. So now with our disadvantage in this negotiation I dont see how we dont give up a Virtanen or a baertschi/tanev and picks to unload a guy and bring back a lower pick.

    We also might have to ship markstrom. 

    You worry too much JB will have to move one guy and we are not loosing Boeser he will sign 

    • Like 1

  14. 18 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:


    Nobody is really saying we can't sign Boeser, it's just disappointing that we're tight to the cap despite being a bad team for the last period of time. We probably will finish higher than we did last year, but it's still not a great team for the dollars being spent. 

    Your kidding right ,this will be a very good team. the Canucks will be 10 wins better than last year.

  15. 5 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

    I dunno. I still kinda think that the fourth line is a grinder line. Hockey doesn't change that much to be honest. And many of the GM's I find are very much traditional and old school mentality. It doesn't surprise me that many coaches still see the fourth line as just that. Be defensively good, and chip in offensively if you are able to. But it's not a place where offensive players could develop their games, because that's not their roles on the fourth line. 


    The first two lines, I find, still get the most ice time, and depending on the game, maybe the third line (if defence is often needed to protect a lead). The fourth line generally has the least amount of minutes. I'd say that if Virtanen is stuck on the fourth, he's never going to amount more than anything than just that - a grinder in the NHL. I want to see if he can actually produce offensively in the NHL. Will that be with the Canucks? maybe not. But I hope he gets a long look, before management and/or coach deems him to only be a fourth line player. I think he has a chance to be so much more than that! 


    The game has changed so get over it 4th line players are developing and are going to be 3 and 2 line players as they produce . Its a faster and more skilled game . If a player is better than his line he will move up .Opportunity to move up will always be there.  If Jake is capable to play in the top 6 he will play in the top 6. This year he will earn his spot too many players better right now.

    • Upvote 1

  16. BB will get signed a lot of hand wringing going on the sky is falling LOL. The point JB is making is no more pushing around our stars we are bigger meaner and harder to play against. So if you want to play hockey we can play any style you want. The press have been saying that JB is chasing the style of past Cup winners. Well look at the past 2 Big Skilled and can play anyway you want. Looks like the Canuck's  are trending that way.

    • Upvote 1