Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

J-P

Members
  • Posts

    1,088
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by J-P

  1. J-P

    2C or 3C

    Fair point. I don't think Jenner will live up to his FA contract as mentioned but you're right that at the right price and if he maintains current level that's a good looking center depth.
  2. J-P

    2C or 3C

    Yeah I was always impressed that Green trusted EP as a center right away. Motte is a nice compliment to Podz but there needs to be a shooter as well (think that is Podz weakness). Lind? I don't believe in the loaded top line going forward so if Podz can actually play center I would suggest something like Miller - EP - Motte/Gadj Pearson - Bo - Hogs Motte/Gadj - Podz - Boeser And that's with no additions to the top 9!
  3. J-P

    2C or 3C

    That would be ideal but not really seeing how Podz is a center. I'd love to be wrong though, Podz playmaking and hustle is a perfect 3C.
  4. J-P

    2C or 3C

    boone jenner, columbus
  5. J-P

    2C or 3C

    Nope. Too expensive, on the downhill and not too impressed by his playoffs stats. He's a good player at the right age for a 3-4 year contract as a 3C so not dismissing it as a proposal, but at the 4-5 mil I expect he'll get it's a no for me. He is the kind of of player you go after if you're being "aggressive" and don't mind overpaying a bit though...
  6. J-P

    2C or 3C

    I know people will flame me for this but I do think there are issues with Miller and that Hirsch has a point that he's not a player you win with. I always got the sense that EP and Miller didn't really like each other but pushed each other to be at their best (although I believe Miller's north/south style robbed off a bit too much on EP). That said, Miller is clearly a very good player with a very intense character, so who knows what playing 3C with pods on his wing might do for him?
  7. J-P

    2C or 3C

    If we can find that center and lock him up for 3-4 years at least sure. I don't think RNH or Reinhart is the answer though. In my eyes these are players you surround your core with on short term contracts via TDL etc, you don't sign or trade for them as long term solutions. I'm not really up to date with the draft, some seem to think McTavish could be 3C in 1-2 years putting up some points. That's more of the solution I'd be looking for, alternatively looking for a 3C that's had a down year and would sign a long term contract at reasonable cost like Wennberg, Soderberg etc. Lowry would have been perfect...
  8. J-P

    2C or 3C

    Agree. It's not about Horvat getting less ice time. He could probably score 60-70 points as an offensive 2C for years to come, but you could argue he's more valuable scoring 40-50 points as a defensive elite 3C (with difference only in deployments and somewhat linemates, not ice time). The alternative of course is to get another elite 3C that can both shutdown opponents top lines and contribute offensively, and get that player ready in 1-2 years on a contract that lasts a few years. Yeah, ok, good luck with that... Anyway, no arguing that Bo is good enough to be the 2C on any team in the league, but if we want to win having 2 good centers is not enough, you need 4.
  9. Just no, anything attached wiith a 5 mil cap hit at age 28+ that's not a 1 RD is not viable imo.
  10. Same reason we should say no to Hoffman, Kuznetzov etc = question marks about character. Hall chose to sign with the bottom team in the league for one year to get a big contract (although knowing he'd likely be dealt at the TDL), he's always been that player that's on the top line on a non winning team who in time gives up on him and/or deals him asap, that tells at least me pretty much everything. Also - not a "premium price" in this case is likely 5-7 mil a year. Hard no for me.
  11. J-P

    2C or 3C

    Yeah he's a 2C on an average team. And he could be 1C on a great team if 2C and 3C are almost as good. That's not the point though...
  12. NHL as opposed to AHL or SHL is not a development league. If you're not good enough on day 1 to stick on the roster on current merits then you need to develop somewhere else. Of course nobody's a finished product on day 1, example the sedins who were good enough to play when they entered the league but clearly not the players they later became. Boeser, QH, EP, hogs earned their spot from the first practice while players like Lind, OJ etc. did not. simple as that. I'm a big fan of OJ and hope he's an essential part of our top 4D going forward, but you're take here is wrong.
  13. J-P

    2C or 3C

    I like the idea and have always thought Horvat is the perfect 3C on a contender. Questions though: 1) Is he good defensively? Both eye test and stats paint a torn picture imo... I would say yes though if not being relied upon to score 2) Who does he play with? He's not a playmaker so needs a player like hogs or baertschi to set him up (good shooter though so should be on PP) 3) Who is the 2C? Miller? Need at least one more winger to make that work But yeah, overall I love the idea and you could argue Bo is too good for 3C, but if you want to win these days I think that's what you need to get three scoring lines.
  14. While I agree that we should somewhat temper expectations I think most fans would be happy with a rookie season where Podz give his everything on every shift and scores 20+ points from the third line. Anything more than that would be a bonus IMO and if he needs more time to fill a role like that then that's fine too, all prospects have a different path to follow, it's not really predictable.
  15. Don't think he'd be a good fit on our roster, even if he was still living up to his contract. Also, we don't have the assets to trade. Giving up Hogs, Podz, Boeser, Horvat etc. would set us back. The only really valuable assets I can think of that we could part with in exchange for a forward are Miller (who's on a good contract but with some question marks IMO and you could speculate he's at his peak now and won't be when we are ready to contend) and/or our 1st round pick, but then the return better be good. Best course of action is probably to stay away from other teams cast offs, keep our pick and make cap room for one FA forward and/or one FA RD.
  16. O So who played center EP:s first season while he finished +3 on a losing team (granted with sheltered deployment)? Not trying to be a smart guy, EP for sure needs to be better in the dot and matching up against faster/heavier opponents in the D zone, but I don't think it's as black and white as you put it that he hasn't played C or won't be able to excel in that role going forward.
  17. Don't agree, making the playoffs and being competitive until the last minute without being dominated in the first round and then building from there would be a result most of the fanbase would accept.
  18. As for LE:s contract in isolation: sure it's bad in hindsight and everyone could see it could be a bit of a problem in the last 2-3 years. That said - all signings of equal or greater dollar amount in 2016 were worse (Okposo, Ladd, Lucic with the extra year, Brower) and while being horrible offensively (which as has been pointed out was not expected and at least to some degree are due to bad luck and bad deployment although most of it is on LE) he has been a quite useful player driving play, shutting down opponents top lines and mentoring younger players. For instance in his third season he assisted on EP:s first goal and was a mentor to him both on and off the ice, Horvat spoke highly of him and surely picked up a few things along the way. Again, not worth 6 mil a year but it's not nothing. As for the timing of the signing and the retool vs rebuild - well, that's another matter, without starting a debate I think we can all agree that in hindsight the rebuild should have started sooner and in that light the LE signing was ill advised.
  19. I agree and I don't say we should do it, but trading LE for a 1st and a 2nd for Seattle to take Holtby and dealing Schmidt for a 2nd + a RD at half the price gives us a net loss of a 1rd pick and (maybe) a downgrade on Schmidt (while adding a needed RD) + 1 mil needed for a backup goaltender. That leaves 12 mil in cap room for FA. Again - not saying we should do this but it's an example of being aggressive while not being reckless. I agree that we should stay patient. If we can get rid of Holtby and trade Schmidt for something valuable I'm all for it, but paying to get rid of LE, Roussell, Beagle etc. is a no no in my book.
  20. This is a recurring theme that I'm not convinced about. I get that EP:s been sheltered with faceoffs and D zone coverage by Miller, but a) has EP ever not lived up to the challenge? Remember when everybody said he couldn't be a center coming in as a rookie and that he needed time in the minors? b) who sheltered him his first season when Miller wasn't around? He seemed to do ok then Not saying you're wrong, but I think either it's time to let EP be the go to guy at C or convert him to a winger that can play center on occasion.
  21. Lots of rumours about a rift between Green and Baertschi, so I think that + his contract + his lack of D skills is what kept him out of the NHL. Definitely don't think he'll come back to the Canucks. A middle six role on a bottom team like Buffalo or Detroit makes sense. Seattle? Maybe as a tweener 3rd line winger, I doubt it though.
  22. Trading our first two picks for LE and for Seattle to take Holtby and trading Schmidt for a physical RD at 2-3 mil and get a 2nd pick back maybe? Not saying we should do that but it's an example of being aggressive without dismantling the team. I do understand where the worries are coming from though...
  23. No way Highmore is protected no matter if staff is high (pun intended) on him. I'd say Sutter is not a good example to prove your point and the jury is still out on Tanev. Lind and Jonah are as you say not NHL players yet, but more of a bust or high ceiling players whereas MacEwen and Highmore is pretty much what you see right now. I would gamble on the upside of Lind and Jonah as stated, but I do see your point from an asset management point of view.
  24. Ha ha fair enough, but the original point of the trade still stands: 1) Did Larsson make Oilers better? 2) Would Hall have made a difference in this years playoffs for the Oilers? I say yes and no and that it was a somewhat even trade although Hall is the better player talent wise 1 for 1.
×
×
  • Create New...