• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

608 Esteemed

About kloubek

  • Rank
    Canucks Prospect
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Recent Profile Visitors

3,189 profile views
  1. You may very well be correct about having Tanev moved. Seems like every time the topic comes up I'm always the advocate for keeping him. I believe every team could use a legit shutdown guy like Tanev just like they can use a PMD. I think to have a cup winning team, you want to find as much balance as possible to have key roles covered, and losing Tanev would make things more difficult. I'd much see an Edler or Gudbranson moved before Tanev. I would not count on the wild cards much. Yes it would be great if they developed into a top line player, but let's face it - the chances are slim. I do agree that free agency is a reasonable place to try to acquire one of these needed players once we have the cap space that is coming. I guess it all depends who becomes available; I know next UFA season looks pretty bleak in regards to players that fit the bill and/or are likely to be able to be acquired by the Canucks. I don't think I'd say it is FAR from dire, but we still have possible ways to success before it becomes so. Here's hoping Benning can bring a winning team to fruition.
  2. Like others have mentioned, we need top end talent. I've been saying it for some time already. The Sedins should not be relied on to carry this team any longer. 2nd line minutes - sure. Besides Horvat (who I am still slotting in as a high end 2nd liner center) and Boeser (who knows how his game will translate to the NHL), we have very little in way of prospects for our top line. We need one excellent center, and at LEAST one excellent winger to join... if not two. We then also require players like Baertschi and/or Virtanen to hit their potential for our 2nd line, or we require help there too. I believe the rest of our forward lineup looks good. To a lesser degree, I think we could still use a #1 PMD. With that said though, the development of Hutton and Stecher greatly reduce that need and I believe if we had the right mix of forwards that we could make do with what we currently have - especially if Juolevi pans out. I don't believe goaltending will be a problem. Markstrom isn't having a great year (along with the rest of the team), but I believe he is a strong presence in the net. Add to that the possibility of Demko developing into a #1 as well, and we should be more or less set in goal. So, I actually don't think we need a lot. But what we need are hard things to obtain given our lack of assets.
  3. No, they don't "suck". They just aren't high end defensemen. They can be entirely serviceable guys, and DO bring an element of physicality. We just need to keep their lack of ability offset with defensemen who actually HAVE a high level of ability.
  4. I have never felt Gudbranson was the best player in the world and was one of the ones who disliked the trade. But how do you figure some of these statements, and the overall conclusion? Hits: Gudbranson hits: 56 (2.24 per game). Sbisa: 44 (6.08 per game). And while it is a matter of opinion, players seems to be affected more by Gudbranson's hits than Sbisa's, imo. So no and no. Creativity (I'll add this in with "smarter") Neither are creative offensively, but I would indeed give the edge to Sbisa. He seems to have better situational awareness of the two, in both ends of the ice. I hate the fact that Gudbranson makes so many "nothing" plays. Shot: I disagree Sbisa has the better shot. Both are highly inaccurate, but I believe the edge goes to Gudbranson for both additional power, as well as the fact he actually does take more of them. In fact, he's taken about double what Sbisa has although he has only been on the ice less than 20% more time. Meanness: Again, I disagree. I don't find Sbisa mean at all. Plus he's been in half the fights of Gudbranson so far this season. (2 to 1) And as for my own interjection, I'd say Gudbranson also excels in leadership, whereas Sbisa is just.... there. Given the option of one over the other, I'd pick Gudbranson. But with that said, Sbisa's overpriced contract is going to look like a deal once we re-sign Gudbranson prior to the start of next season.
  5. Horvat is great Whether he becomes our #1 center or remains a solid #2, he's going to be a big part of our team for a long time. I personally believe a great goalie wins you games on his own. Time will tell if it was a decent trade for us, but there is no doubt what we lost in Schneider, and while we have great potential in both Markstrom (who of course came back in the Lu trade) and Demko, it remains to be seen if either will rise to the same elite level. For me at least, I know I was so upset about it because of the way we ended up losing TWO elite goalies - both for a lesser return than they were worth, we ended up on the hook for Luongo's contract which wasn't even that bad if we had kept it, AND we couldn't even keep one of the two because Gillis had messed up the situation royally. It was the entire situation that upset me the most. Trading for hit-or-miss players was only the icing on the s**t cake. ..but in the end, we might not come out of it so bad....
  6. Didn't we have a thread going discussing exactly this already? Sedins will finish their careers as Canucks. Bet on it.
  7. I honestly don't know if I would do this - though most probably would. Art, imo you are undervaluing Baertschi and overvaluing Tanev. (The latter of which is probably somewhat accurate, but I'm not sure it is in the eyes of most) This sounds weird for me to even type, since I have seemed down on Baertschi and up on Tanev over the last year. A well rounded, second line winger with age to continue to still improve is worth more than Colorado's 2nd, imo. Considering how many players end up missing after being drafted, and the fact that Jost - though he's looked excellent - has been playing against lesser talent, I'd say he's worth about the same as Baertschi at this point in time. Baertschi = Jost Tanev = Landeskog Vancouver 1st > Colorado 2nd To me, value-wise, we just trade down our pick. Don't get me wrong - I'd LOVE to have Landeskog. But I'd really hate to lose Tanev; it is so incredibly rare to find defensemen who truly shut down as well as he does. And this was positioned as a lottery pick, which I trust Benning would do well with... even though we'd get screwed on our position again, I'm sure of it. Now make it Edler, and I'm all over that trade and I believe it to be pretty evenly valued. Not sure if Colorado needs d or not.... Edler, Baertschi, Vancouver 1st for Landeskog, Jost, Colorado 2nd
  8. Agreed. I would absolutely be willing to give up Guds for Draisaitl. The fact is that we have a handful of young defensemen that have the potential of being high end players in 1-3 years. We do not, however, have many forward players who are likely to be good enough for our 1st line, and unless Horvat surprises, nobody at center. Besides that, for what Gudbranson obviously brings, I feel that his decision making skills are just plain suspect. The last few games I've been specifically watching him, and when it comes to passing or what to do with the puck when he has it, the guy just seems clueless sometimes and more often than not doesn't make the best available play. Don't get me wrong - I love his size and leadership, plus the fact he leads the team in hits.... but to get a decent sized center for our first line who will likely be close to a point a game player in short order would be far too tempting to give up. I'd even give up Tanev for Draisaitl, which is saying a lot considering Tanev is one of the very premier shutdown guys in the league and I believe is our most important defenseman at this point in time and is not the kind of guy you end up drafting or acquiring often. Despite Edmonton's needs, I don't see Guds being enough to make a trade for Draisaitl happen. Perhaps Gudbranson, our 2nd round from Columbus, and Cassels? I don't think even that is good enough value, but you never know... Edmonton really does need to improve their D still.
  9. Absolutely claim him. Those are solid numbers for a free player. At worst, we claim him and he doesn't show Benning what he wants to see, and then gets waived again. Once a player realizes they are one step away from exiting the NHL with it's million dollar contracts, I think it lights a fire under many. Could be a steal.
  10. I expect Kadri to be a target, but I expect anything done to him will be within the confines of the game as we know it. It is entirely possible to see another brawl though...
  11. I think we have an excellent defence in the making. It's already good, but will prove to get far better as our young guys continue to develop and Joulevi and possibly Subban reach the big leagues. As far as the worth of the young guys on our blueline, I don't see the point in even considering moving them. While extremely promising, their worth right now isn't nearly what most will be worth in 2-3 years. Stetcher, Hutton, and Tryamkin will all be players other GMs will be calling about. I think the only way you get rid of a young player now is if you don't believe they are likely to work out as expected, and all three will. It's simply far better to wait and see how they turn out than to get a substandard return. If anything, we would be better off moving the guys who've been in the league longer. Elder is the most obvious of a defenceman we can lose while getting a solid return. Even Tanev, if you must - though I've long been an advocate of keeping him. I'd say Sbisa, but he'd garner little in the way of a return.
  12. I take this all as a positive. Virtanen clearly desires to have open communication with Benning, and he wouldn't do so if he truly felt all hope was lost. As well, the only reason he has Benning's number (we presume) is because Benning wants open communication himself from his players. All good stuff. Jake has to realize that he needs to contribute. What I've seen from him is a lack of scoring, a lack of hockey IQ (which may never come), and seemingly uninspired play much of the time. I maintain he has all the tools to be a really good player in this league, but need needs to grow up and needs to put in the effort required to get results.
  13. ...may I introduce to you, exhibit "B" in the form of Erik Gudbranson....
  14. 100X? Hardly. They are just different players. Both have a reasonable amount of size. I believe Gelinas is actually bigger, but doesn't use that extra size to his advantage. I'd say Sbisa is (believe it or not) a bit better defensively, but Eric makes up for it with a far better shot. Can you ever see Sbisa getting 30 points in a season? Ever? And let's not forget the huge difference in salary. With all this said, I haven't seen his game since over the last few years, and I'm sure there must be a reason he was traded for just a third, was a healthy scratch for many games, and is now on waivers.
  15. That would be incorrect. It wasn't a general statement at all if you actually chose to follow the conversation. That particular quote came from my response to Nuck7635, where he talked about Sven's production... and which was in itself a response to MY post about production. That was the conversation at the time. Then you misinterpreted what was said and thus went off on your own little tangent which including things like Baertschi's contract value and defensive ability - which I don't believe were mentioned by either of us, and I certainly never denied. Of course, I could have prefixed every sentence with "Baertschi's point totals" so individuals with short attention spans could follow, but that would make for difficult reading, and I refuse to cater to the lowest common denominator. So please, feel free to carry on discussing your points which have nothing to do with what I'm saying, but I won't be coming back into this thread to respond; I already get my fill of false premise debates with my wife. Good day sir.