janisahockeynut

Members
  • Content Count

    4,340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,159 Gaming the system

1 Follower

About janisahockeynut

  • Rank
    Canucks Second-Line
  • Birthday 06/01/1957

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

8,394 profile views
  1. Naw, just need a connection over in Russia....we could call Trump I guess
  2. LOL......mine was Hughes.....I wanted one of the other 2 defensemen...…...Dobson and the Edmonton guy (Bouchard?) Funny how important it was back then, now I could care less...and can't even remember their names...….LOL, can't believe Benning did not go off the list I sent him...lol
  3. The trouble is, that everyone yells and screams, working off of their own lists....
  4. I think that in the instance of Callahan, he scored at pretty much the same rate as JV or LE, and has leadership characteristics in spades, IMO, that is a guy Jake should be watching, if only for 1 year......he also has the chance of being traded at the TDL...but either way, there is no one to push him out, other than Jake.....(we are not talking 1st line here)...Even if you sat him, he until injury, I see no real loss, either way.....I also think MacEwen could benefit from watching his attitude towards the game. I would not expect to see Darling in a Canuck uniform (ever) except in emergency...….slightly better that the university kid from Van......slighty Ericsson, is a 3rd pairing Dman, but again, he could be moved at the TDL for assurance for a top team...……. As for the extra players.....proven fact more players means more 100 game players......again proven Again another proven fact is that 2nd round picks turn out at a better rate than 3rd rounders, and high end 2nd's even better..... It is not that I disagree with you entirely, but I am asking is for you to consider 1 or 2 of these moves, as frame work moves, that would help...……. I am also not saying that Benning would not even go further and move up on the Tampa pick to get a higher 1st round pick or prospect...….. On the prospect front, I am not sure how many times a good prospect is moved for what I am offering, it is usually for futures (Picks) I also tried to make sure that who ever we picked up would be on one and 2 year contracts ------------------------------------------------------------ I am also of the thought that an educated guess by Benning should be to enquire about Fox and offer a 4th rounder with another conditional 3rd if he signs or bump it up a round if they take 2020 picks..... educated guess = making some phone call to see if he would even be interested in Vancouver But this is a separate trade idea...…. -------------------------------------------------------------- What I guess, is my point is that Benning should be aggressive and be trying to acquire picks now, as we have a surplus of cap room, and a surplus of middle type players, Hopefully Benning should be exploiting one of those two things, if not both!
  5. Yes, I really think it matters where you are in your rebuild, how long you have your core players signed for (there could be retribution), and where you are in the standings..... I don't just think you sign a good RFA because you want him, which is why there are not too many (IF Any) signed. But if you have everything under control...……….. No Luongo contract No Eriksson contract All your Core on long term deals and your top 2 lines and top pairing full except that one RFA Yeah hell go for it! But don't ever cry when someone does it to you...... I think the NHL is there right now...………"Do you feel lucky, punk? Do you?"
  6. Hey, I got the J right and I misspelled the rest every time....so does mean I am OK? LOL Yes, I know I did not imply it, but we don't necessarily have to take all 3..... But Hammer, don't you think it also implies something else as well ?. To me it means the team is trying, and that Benning is open to all possibilities..... The way I see it is...……. Callahan is still able to play a 2nd line role on a rebuilding team if not just to get past the year, but I don't think he would do harm Darling, I see in the Minors....how far down, depends on him Ericsson can still play 2nd line D, albeit not on a contender. But, the point is that I don't think it sends a bad message, especially if players know it is only temporary, and just because they are signed, doesn't necessarily mean they get those positions, it only means they can. I think in Ericsson's and Callahan's cases, they will be here for such a short time, I think it would be easy for the team to get behind it, especially if Benning does go out and up grade the 1st Line LW spot...... There would be lots of work for Benning, but at the end of the day, you are tell EP, QH, BB, and BH that you are working to bring in more high end talent...….I think they understand the process, a lot more then the fans Case in point that in junior, teams will sometimes trade away a veteran star in their last year, if it is time to rebuild...…..in those cases, the GM's come right out and say, this is in the long term interests of the team, I see no difference...…..but that is cool
  7. Great stat site Jim...….I am a numbers guy so they mean something to me...……. Some things that jump out at me...….. 1. That stats used were over a extended period of time, and I have the belief in general, that scouting is getting more precise and with less surprises. This may be the Benning effect, and we just may buck the trend a little, but to me, there seems to be a change. 2. The type of player drafted high is changing, as the game changes, with more emphasis put on agility, speed, and puck moving over size, shot, and aggressiveness. Again, a general statement. 3. These tables also emphasis the need to collect additional(more) early picks, when rebuilding, as the higher you get the better chance you have, and multiple picks in any round, double or triple your chance of getting that gem in the rough. 4. Remember, these are only averages and not GM specific...…..Meaning, you have good drafters and bad drafters In regards to your comments (that were fair by the way) I consider all 3 trades as cash dumps/cap dumps for their teams, and because of either age or ability, are on their way out. In Callahan's and Ericsson's cases, I believe, that their teams are selling high, as they will not play in the league at all, after their present contracts expire. As per your comments on trade #3 and Hutton...….Hutton played with Gudbranson for over half a season, and Gud was just so bad, so I think Hutton's stats are skewed, and that his play when forced into a 27 minute games, alongside Stecher, with very strong showings, only goes to underline Hutton's ability to rise to the occasion. IMO, Hutton surely showed his ability to be a top 4 Dman...maybe a 4, but still a top 4. The question is, will Hutton beat the stat for a #35 pick, which is like asking, will Hutton play another 100 NHL games, which I think he easily will. I also think it shows that the year before last, was a sophomore slump, which many have...So, I think that Hutton is close by himself as a one for one trade for the 35th OA, and that again Ericsson is a cash dump. As for Gaunce, I think he has value, as a 4th liner, and I think his underlaying numbers, show that. He is a LWer on a team overloaded with them, but yet he still had time up, I think he is a reliable fringe NHLer....(Take note of his limited play last year) Very respectable. I would remind you, these are frame work deals to get additional high 2nd picks, and are flexible (or at least that is what I had in mind), and as I quoted to another member, we could add to any of these deals, to make them work if need be. My point in suggesting these trades, was that we have the ability to make these types of trades, and that they are possible without giving away major assets, if you find the right team.... In the real world I would not expect all 3 deals to happen in the same year, but I think 2 could...…..But Benning would have to be out in front of them, so the pitchforks did not come out. In saying that, it is all subjective, and I appreciate your points...... Cheers! Good Stats!
  8. Thanks for the comments Rick #1 Most hockey players do not hate Vancouver, matter of fact like it, and if the GM comes up and says they have an offer to Vancouver that will help the club, Callahan is a stand up guy and takes it. #2 The pencil was not sharp when I did the math....but it is still 6M, and I think that is enough smoke to get their attention...granted it may take a little more...but the point is the frame work for a trade.....it might take a little work, but I think you could frame it well enough to get it done...….add a futures to, and have Benning whisper we owe ya one.....the point is the frame work... #3 I don't think Gaunce is any screamer, but he has good underlaying AHL numbers, and I think him and Hutton (who I remind you played great away from Gudbranson) would also get them thinking...….I don't think we are giving away the farm, and we could add, but I am not sure we have to...but we could add a 2020 - 3rd if needed or a 4th this year....but again the frame work is there...... But all worthy points to consider...…. But the fact is, it really helps us long term, and with minimal pain. Thanks Again for the observations
  9. So, You are cheating on your phone, with a new one...…...I bet the old one is speechless!
  10. Trade #1 Tampa trades 2019 1st (27 OA) + Ryan Callahan (1 year @$5,800,000) for Vancouver 2019 2nd (40th OA) Trade #2 Carolina trades Buffalo's 2019 2nd (36th OA) + Carolina's 2019 2nd (52nd OA) + Scott Darling (2 years @ $3,125,000 per) for Vancouver's 2019 3rd (71st) + 2021 3rd Trade #3 Detroit trades 2019 2nd (35 OA) + Johan Ericsson ( 1 year @ $4,250,000) for Ben Hutton + Brendan Gaunce ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Trade #1 Tampa does this to shed cap, without hurting the teams core. Tampa drops only 13 spots to achieve this. Vancouver does this, as Callahan still can play, just not on a elite team, with the contract only being one year, Vancouver can handle the extra cap Vancouver moves up for a faller. Trade #2 Carolina rids cap, does this so that they can go after big fish (UFA's). Despite what fans think, owners do not like spending money for nothing. Vancouver does this to gain the asset. (Darling's Buy Out is #1,500,000 X4 this year= 6M) Trade #3 Detroit does this for several reason, cap reduction, and gaining 2 young assets. Vancouver does this to gain asset, and to allow Gaunce the chance of an NHL career....teams do that you know! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IN: Ryan Callahan, Johan Ericsson, Scott Darling, = $13,175,000*, + 2019 27th OA, 2019 35th OA, 2019 36th OA, 2019 52nd OA OUT: Ben Hutton, and Brendan Gaunce = $2,800,000 + 2019 40th OA + 2019 3rd + 2021 3rd * Keep in mind, $10,050,000 is gone after 1 year ** Still plenty of cap to Resign Brock Boeser ($6.500.000?) ***5 picks in the top 52 in the 2019 entry draft. 2019 10th 2019 27th 2019 35th 2019 36th 2019 52nd (Before 2019-2020) And still enough cap after clearing unwanted assets to buy a UFA not named Panarin or Karlsson (Before 2020-2021) 1 year later $10M back from RC + JE + $4M= 14M Cap increase, in time to re-sign EP + QH (Before 2021-2022) Another year after that SD off books $3 M + LE $6M + $4 M cap increase clear Plus there should be a buy out, in there somewhere????? OK......Coastal.....Flame away!
  11. Jones has a .910 save percentage and approx. 2.50 goals against average while playing an average 63 games per year over his 4 year tenure with San Jose His contract has 5 more years at $5,750,000...…... I personally think from what I hear out of San Jose, that Jones has been playing pretty terrible, and most of his success has come from playing on a good team...…. I am banking on San Jose having a Scott Darling on their hands for a lot more money and a lot longer contract...………………..as San Jose ages, it isn't going to get any better. IMO...……………...Happy Easter!