J-P
-
Posts
1,088 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by J-P
-
-
The canadian division might look tough on paper but if the Nucks are a serious playoff team Ottawa and Montreal should be beaten most nights, so in reality we only need to edge out one of the other teams. Another thing that stands out to me is that the seedings probably won't matter that much, as long as you get into the playoffs anything's possible.
-
1
-
-
If I were to guess I'd say in a few years Dahlin will be dominant on both O and D and the ranking will be:
1) Dahlin
2) QH
3) Makar
I do think that regardless of this, the things QH brings are more vital to the Canucks than what the other players bring. That's not an unimportant part of this discussion. I believe the things Dahlin will provide for the Sabres that QH can't can be solved by committee, while being the dynamo offensively that QH is is more important to our team both short term and long term.
-
56 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:
The club did not set him up for success, nothing about a bad attitude at all.
Until we have other players who can do this I continue to wait for NT to return... Also note the casual way NT leans in to the hit and dismisses any follow ups.
-
1
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Googlie said:
Is there nothing this alien can't do?
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/on-the-bench-boys-elias-pettersson-canucks-goalie#.X5JqkMtkXTg.link
Ha ha you gotta love that
-
3 minutes ago, grandmaster said:
But why would a non producing player be given a roster spot when it ought to go to ones that actually produce? How do you not see the negatives in this? Hell, give the spot to a prospect. At least the positive in that is the kid gets the experience and if he doesn’t pan out then try another prospect afterwards.
LE, regardless of “working hard”, should not be on this team and in keeping him sends the wrong message to the others.
I'm not arguing whether he should be on the team or not. He does provide some value defensively, but as you said doesn't produce offensively anymore and is a fringe player at best which is also obvious from his healthy scratches.
All I'm saying is that even though we all wish he would retire so we get rid of his cap hit I don't think it's fair to question his character or work level.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, grandmaster said:
Maybe you should rethink the importance of “hustle” and put more emphasis on production.
2019-2020
Reg Season 49 games - 6 goals and 7 assists (mostly empty net points) . He was also a minus 2.
Playoffs 10 games - 0 goals, 0 assistsHis “working hard” is meaningless.
Bo (who btw was -15 in the regular season) says otherwise. I'm not saying LE is a great player anymore or that his contract is anything but abysmal at this point, just that he works hard and is not a negative factor to the team (except for the cap hit).
-
5 minutes ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:
You sayin' there's no quit in him?!!
Say what you will about LE, and the contract is obviously unfortunate, but he's always worked hard on and off the ice and does hustle constantly while not being a physical player.
-
I get signing one of Spezza or Thornton, and maybe Simmonds can have a purpose on a checking line although I'm hesitant he can be effective in that role at this stage. But signing all three to that lineup? Sounds crazy to me...
In other words - I love it!!!
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Provost said:
Some of that appears to be overblown as well. Lots of word has come out that it was the Karlsson’s at the root of a lot of it, but who was the club going to support at the time?
Lots of word has come out doesn't scream credibility to me. Fact is we don't know, although if you go by the old saying where there's smoke there's fire o guess that would apply to both Hoffman and Karlsson in this case.
I will say though that Benning and co have done a great job assembling only character guys - Virt maybe the exception but a bit unclear who really wanted him and regardless a sole miss with one draft pick is forgivable - so I have faith that they will make the right calls in that area going forward.
-
4 hours ago, Lionized27 said:
It should be noted that when Trotz left for Long Island he took Mitch Korn with him.
Maybe an outlier but that 1-2 years of "decline" falls right into this timeline.
Let's hope that's it!
-
6 hours ago, aGENT said:
Have you compared his and Marky's ages...?
Marky has has had his best two years, Holtby the opposite, so that's the difference. As I said most goalies around 30 and in decline continue to decline.
Doesn't mean Holtby can't bounce back, but my point was that it's not a good bet to make that Holtby will be as good as Marky was (and this situation doesn't require him to be).
-
1 minute ago, aGENT said:
What 'stage' would you be referring to here...?
Age and 1-2 years of decline, i.e. the stage of his career. He could turn it around but most goalies around 30 in that circumstances don't.
-
1 minute ago, Junkyard Dog said:
Eh Tanev played less when we got Myers. A part of the reason he was healthy(for the most part).
Still see Myers eating up a lot of minutes. Especially on the PK with Tanev gone.
Good point and Eddy will get his minutes as well (but also benefit from a little less ice time). Top 4D is really solid now if Schmidt or QH play on the right side. Sign a defensive physical RD for the third pairing and let Joulevi go and things are looking much better on D all of a sudden.
-
1
-
-
I think if Holtby has a good enough season for Seattle to pick him with only one year left that's a win for us. Demko is our no 1 anyway and we gave up nothing except some cap room for Holtby.
People saying Holtby will be as good as Marky with some help from Clarke though, well, he could be, but more likely he will be an elite backup at this stage (hopefully good enough to play 30-40% of the games), which in that case is fine. Worst case he's a regular backup that will be a great mentor for Demko and that's fine too.
-
7 hours ago, Provost said:
Dhaliwal is saying that Virtanen's camp wants to do a deal before arb. Somewhere between $2.5-3.0.
That would certainly make it easier to trade him if there was cost certainty!Yeah a 2 year deal around 2.5 is what I expect will happen, and that's a compromise everyone should be ok with.
Arbitration hearings rarely end well, more often than not it creates a rift between player and team and few players receiving arbitration awards stay on their team for more than a season or so.
-
4 hours ago, qwijibo said:
4 years @ $4.25m for a 28 year old top 6 winger? Doesn’t remotely seem like a future buy out. It does seem like sour grapes on your part though.
The amount is fine, the term is not. You always have to overpay for free agents, and that's just what Montreal did, with term.
For every comparable FA to Toffoli that's a good signing there's at least 3 ones that look really bad either from the start or for the second half of the contract. So Benning refusing to hand out term and/or clauses for Marky/Tanev/Toffoli is definitely the right move at this phase for the organization IMO.
-
2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:
Beagle shouldn't be lumped in with that group his experience is valuable as is his face off work, it's no surprise between Malholtra and Beagle’s work here our face off numbers have improved dramatically.
Agree. And Roussel has had a bad concussion and a bad knee injury after signing so he's somewhat excused for not shining.
It's also worth noting that apart from Motte, Beagle and Roussel are the only consistently physical forwards on the team. I think Benning knew all along that he overpayed with both money and term to get these guys but decided it was worth it because of team needs. Can't say I disagree.
-
1
-
-
If Toffoli would've signed for 2 years we could've given him more than 4.25. Since he wants term it's no thank you. Contracts with term for forwards hitting 30 or over 30 is not what you want to sign if you're entering a contending window. Remember Sam Gagner anyone? Maybe Ryan Spooner that we had to trade Gagner for? I'm sure everyone remembers Louie. But sure, even though all those other free agents busted after a year or two, Toffoli is a sure thing ;-)
I like Toffoli but he's not elite and there's no sense in giving him 4 years for us when it's very possible he won't be effective anymore in year 3 and 4. He's actually a much better fit for Montreal, both short term and long term as he can maybe be a bottom six player in their system if need be.
I do agree with most people here though that I really hope we have some additions to the roster soon...
-
1
-
1
-
-
He can also still be signed before arbitration.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I'll hold on the Banning doubts until he actually makes a bad deal or signing. So far signing Holtby and letting Marky, Stecher and Tanev walk were under the circumstances all good decisions in my eyes.
-
6
-
Splitting the starts between Demko and Holtby pretty evenly for a while makes sense for a number of reasons. Team D needs to be better next season and there is some risk to this approach but also lots of upside and a risk worth taking IMO.
I see it as a pretty offensive move where we trust Demko and Ian Clarke and don't feel we have to spend lots of cap on goaltending to continue improving. I like it.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, 10pavelbure96 said:
This is driving me nuts lol.
I keep refreshing and checking my phone every 5 mins.
So quiet on the Canucks front
.....
Ha ha totally agree. One thing I think gets overlooked though is that previous years Benning pretty much had to overpay with both money and term to attract free agents that were needed (Myers, Beagle and Roussel the obvious examples). That's not the case anymore so staying chill and wait out while others make the mistakes could be a brilliant strategy. Of course he's made mistakes in the past - LE, Ferland, Benn in hindsight - and he does need to make up for them by shedding cap somehow, but it's not like he's suddenly learned everything about being a GM over one season, he dealt from a position of weakness before.
So a good RHD by trade and a couple of cheap FA forwards now and we're good to go
-
3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:
Certainly that 400K would be affordable, if Tryamkin were leaving the KHL to sign a $2-3M contract with the Canucks. He’d still make more money for the year, even paying that fee out of his own pocket. It will be interesting to see what he does (and what the Canucks do), but it’s conceivable that he could be signed for opening day of the Canucks’ 2020-21 season. He’d just need to come up with that ~400K termination fee, which he’d make back (and more) fairly quickly. It would appear to be in his financial interest to do this, if the Canucks decide to bring him back.
Still, I’m not sure if he’ll do it or not. I have a feeling he might just finish out the deal, even if it doesn’t make the most sense, financially speaking. Tryamkin seems to be a guy who believes in honouring his commitments, and I could see him completing the full KHL season, before making his next move.
Agree on that and there's also the fact that if he terminates in KHL and join NHL for camp and a season start 1/1 2021 he's in for a VERY long season all in all, not sure that's a good approach. Not sure what the Canucks' take is either, maybe they've already written him off until 21/22.
-
5 hours ago, Kobayashi Maru said:
Oh I agree that there would be a 0% change they would be paired together. It would be Myers paired with Hughes and Barrie paired with Edler. I think that could work and I think it allows Edler to move from a two way D to more of a defensive D which I think matches better with his career trajectory.
Agree on all that, but when it happens, watch for Edler to still quietly putting up 30-40 points while being one of the hardest D to engage with in the western conference as usual.
-
1
-
1
-
Arvid Costmar | C
in Prospects / Farm Team
Posted
Costmar arguably the best player on the ice in the 1st period. Not sure has he has the skill to be an NHL player, but he has all the other tools to be a heavy pest as a 3/4C that can still provide some offense. Really nice low pick with high upside.