• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

266 Excellent

About 5nothincanucksohno

  • Rank
    Comets Regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. Plus almost better if he ends up being a 18 goal 22 assist type player provided he retains solid possession numbers and is strong on the forecheck. Rather the Canucks pay him in the 4 million dollar range and spend big money on guys like Horvat and Peterson.
  2. Although many have not being paying attention this has been the plan all along. Phase one: build up depth at the NHL level so that younger players have strong role models as they join the team. Phase two: draft and develop a good mix of hard working, high IQ, skilled prospects and slowly inject them into the NHL lineup. Phase 3: Win the Cup.
  3. Especially when it comes to the cap era. Points for a lot of guys simply inflate their cap hit. Teams need to plug different roles at different values to be successful. I was actually just thinking about this issue in regards to Virtanen...if some of the Canucks offensive prospects pan out, it might end up being better if Virtanen is a 18 goal 22 assist guy but has solid possession numbers and causes havoc on the forecheck. That is a huge asset to have and if his cap hit is only in the $4mil range (rather than $6mil plus) all the better.
  4. I never wrote that Tanev was equal to or better than Reinhart, just that Buffalo is in a position where they need to be better now. Buffalo is really deep at centre and need top pairing D-men who can keep the puck out of their own net...Tanev is one of the best in the league at that. The other point I made is that Benning doesn't have to trade Tanev...there is absolutely no need so unless a team offers someone like Reinhart, then he doesn't have to move. Benning has all the leverage and can use that to his advantage...either he keeps Tanev (great) or he gets a stud forward in return.
  5. That might be true but more often it is about the current position of the squad...Buffalo needs to start improving now (owner is restless) and in order to do that they need top pairing d-men. They have a bunch of young, talented forwards so like the Hall trade it might just end up being the cost of doing business. I could see a 3rd or 4th round pick included by Van but the good thing is Benning is under no pressure to do so.
  6. JVR is a good player no doubt but from a logical viewpoint (considering where the Leafs and Canucks both are as franchises) that would effectively be a cap dump for the Leafs...so Tanev + cap dump for who from Leafs? Would have to be their 2018 1st and a really good prospect.
  7. Oddsmakers are constantly altering the odds throughout the season and the trend at this moment in time is to doubt the Canucks given their previous season. There is also no doubt that the NHL team is currently in a Valley but the thing detractors miss is that the main goal for the NHL squad is to remain stable in order to avoid the tire fire that was TO/Edm/etc. Those teams have now turned it around but it took them over a decade (even though all the detractors say the current management did it in a couple of years). Sports commentators are constantly wrong so I don't put much faith in their predictions. Not exactly a brainy bunch. Analytics crowd has been complimentary of the the TDL, the draft and July 1 FA so take that for what it is worth. If Horvat, Boeser, Peterson, Juolevi, and Demko pan out like projected, that is the making of a quality team. Add in role player draft picks and a couple astute trades and there is no reason why the team can't contend.
  8. Agree, they don't actually analyze the overall team that much just superimpose their vision of how a rebuild should be done. TO for example has done extremely well over the last three years, no one can deny that but when Shanny took over the franchise was in a totally different position: over a decade of no playoffs (except one year), no real core veterans, a lot of low draft picks from previous 7 - 8 years, and guaranteed sell outs. The Canucks were/are not in the same position. At this point, they are focused on acquiring/developing youth, transitioning from the Sedins and above all else avoiding the tire fire that was the Oilers/Maple Leafs/etc. for a decade - hence creating stability at the NHL level so that when prospects do get injected into the line-up, their development isn't ruined. Eastern media has its take but doesn't really matter because I believe Benning will prove them wrong. That's just me though.
  9. Ya, if the Canucks could somehow put together a deal around Tanev and next years 1st would be interesting (although 1st would be tough to give up)
  10. Don't disagree but it sounds like they tried but for example Bouma went a different direction. Not too concerned though because I think that is the type of player they can target via trade. Lots of pieces now to make that happen if needed.
  11. More info from CanucksArmy https://canucksarmy.com/2017/06/28/8-players-the-canucks-could-sign-as-reclamation-projects-part-2/
  12. Agree, needs to be incentive for the prospects. The good thing is that these signings aren't prohibitive - shorter term, low AAV. There will be injuries so the young guys will get chances to prove themselves at the NHL level - plus it will be less pressure and more reps in the AHL while waiting for call up.
  13. There is still no reason why that can't happen...signing short term, low dollar free agents just allows them to come up when ready. All young guys (minus McDavid, etc.) are better off spending at least 1 or 2 years in the AHL. These signings allow for this but at the same time don't prevent the Canucks from calling up prospects when they are ready or when injuries strike.
  14. Exactly, I don't put much faith in what Ray says anymore - he clearly views the tank as the best option but the league has changed (and not just the draft). There is clearly a plan to support the youth on the NHL team, build depth and allow the prospects to mature properly in the AHL. Everyone references the Blue Jackets, To, and Edm - and it is true that they have now turned things around but it took them over a decade in each case. They had different paths but the clear trend is all three failed when it came to drafting and prospect development (i.e. didn't add youth, drafted poorly, or rushed prospects into the NHL - Canucks are avoiding all three). You think he would have a better grasp given all the horrible teams he played on. In a nineteen year career he only played 10 or more playoff games three times in a season.
  15. The reality is you can't rush the majority of young players into the NHL. The evidence shows teams are better off having their prospects play at least 1 or 2 years in the AHL. If the Canucks can build up the depth on the NHL team, then prospects can get reps in the AHL and then get called up when injuries strike - less pressure and also allows the team to slowly test where the prospect is at. I know many people don't like the plan but I think it is way to go (unless McDavid is the draft pick)