Vanuckles

Members
  • Content Count

    2,018
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Vanuckles last won the day on August 9 2014

Vanuckles had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,911 Revered

1 Follower

About Vanuckles

  • Rank
    Canucks Regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Hockey

Recent Profile Visitors

10,269 profile views
  1. He's not slipping past Chicago he's Keith's replacement and the way they see it, Keith can take him under his tutelage the way the Sedins were supposed to take Petey under their tutelage. This word makes me cringe. The whole sentiment that Keith would tutor a good BC kid makes me cringe. But I just don't see us or anyone prying that pick out of Chicago's vice grip.
  2. I'm not on the get Lucic bandwagon, that said I'd give him a few chances if we do get him. This may be a video game trade, but it's actually pretty beneficial for both teams: To EDM: Eriksson (50% retained) Sutter (50% retained) To VAN: Lucic 8th overall Caveat: Lucic does not ask for his NMC to be reinstated. EDM gets 2/3 of an effective shutdown 3rd line + plus 2 very good penalty killers, which was a noted weakness of theirs last year. They get the depth they're looking for in the forward group which allow McDavid, Draisaitl and RNH to focus strictly on offense in their top 6. Would have a pretty significant ripple effect throughout their lineup. And they get those players for less money than what they're paying Lucic. They'd still need to fix their defense but this gets them a step closer to being competitive, and McDavid might be able to drag them into the playoffs. We get toughness in the forward group which we have been sorely missing since Dorsett. We get an 8th overall pick for our trouble. Nuff said. We might need to add... EDIT: Just reading the last few pages and it turns out someone else already suggested this and discussed at length.
  3. Well typically that's been the case but the difference in speed and skill has been unprecedented. The number of vets alone that have been pushed into retirement because they can't keep up has been insane over the last couple of years. Tryamkin was always a solid skater, but I don't know if he's still above average anymore. He'll still be able to keep up but his offense might be a bit limited because he might not be able to carry the puck as much. I'm torn about his contract dilemma, as I'm sure every other fan is. On the one hand it shows that he's at least a little loyal to a team he signed a contract with, but at the same time it's taking away from some of the most important formative years of his career.
  4. And had Pouliot been given a deal where he burns off one year of his ELC it would have been fine because he was such an impressive prospect, but there's your prime example of a prospect looking unbelievably promising and then have the wheels fall off the wagon in his development. Also, let me throw your argument back your way: Tryamkin was a third pairing Dman, a few years ago, I don't know what he is now with the league getting so much faster, and him playing in a much lesser league with much different logistics. https://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/news/2003-gn-001-en Hundreds of thousands if not millions have not made the NHL over the span of just a few years. You can bet thousands of them didn't make it because of some red flags. I'm not saying Tryamkin can't play in the NHL, it's just a counter point to your handful of examples of players who made an impact in the NHL despite having off-ice issues. I hope Tryamkin is in that elite company. He's one player with all those off ice issues. You had to name 4 different players to account for the red flags I mentioned in one player. He had to know the coaching staff was being heavily scrutinized and management might have even told him they're getting rid of WD if he complained about his icetime/deployment to JB. It had to be about family imo, so why complain about the coaching staff in the media? Again, all I'm looking from him is a bit of a blue collar attitude without all the entitlement. I know I know... how dare I utter that word again since it triggers so many posters. I just won't bury my head in the sand about a player because he's big. He's not a teenager anymore where you're hoping he'll grow out of it. He's well in his mid twenties and he's only got a couple more years before it gets harder and harder for him to get acclimated to a new league and a new life. I think it's absolutely vital that he makes the transition as early as possible. Like as early as next week so that he can better get used to the city and the system here before he has to worry about training camp and making a good impression on the new coaching staff. In case you're still wondering what I'm trying to say, I bolded it in my post. In other words, compete and character.
  5. If he finds chemistry with Hughes he might be able to become a good complimentary guy but that's assuming Hughes develops into a top pairing Dman. But people looking for him to be Hughes' bodyguard like Schenn are going to be disappointed. Tryamkin is not a fighter. Hopefully he can complement his play well and it's great that he plays the right side. But yes, he was not top 4 in the one year he played here. Hopefully he comes back and keeps improving, but the earlier he makes it back the better. I already said that because of his waiver eligibility which I forgot about, the AHL clause is a moot point so I don't know why you're still going on about that. The bolded part is exactly our point of contention. He's a guy who got drafted as an overager in the third round meaning every team passed on him 9 times and some teams 10 times before the Canucks drafted him. I would have liked to see more dedication and a blue collar attitude towards the team who took a chance on him and gave him a start in the NHL, which helped put him on other teams radar if in fact he is on other team's radar. At this point, I'm not even sure he's looking at the fact that he got drafted as a positive, but that's speculation on my part. I can't say that I was happy we did that with those guys, except Hughes. We all knew Hughes could play in the NHL even and he really needed to see what the NHL is like so that he knows how hard he needs to work in the summer. Granted, Tryamkin probably can also play in the NHL right now as a bottom pairing guy, but again you're getting fixated about the AHL clause, the AHL clause is a moot point because of waiver eligibility which I completely forgot about, so you win that argument. Here are the red flags which none of these guys have in common with Tryamkin: mouthing off in the media about the coaching staff and the city, not showing up to camp in shape, refusing to play in the AHL as a 22 year old, demanding ice time and deployment, bolting back to the KHL for 3 years, and those are incredibly important development years, at the slightest hint of trouble - albeit he might have done it for his family as well which I can't blame him for, but when he was asked about it in the media he cited ice time and deployment issues. Posters, not you so far, but other posters in this thread are acting like me having issues with his entitlement and overall attitude is completely unsubstantiated and an attempt to defame him. It's not. Yeah hang on, let me list the thousands of players whose careers got completely derailed because of red flags... Look I always said he has promise. He's got a skillset we need and despite my supposedly horrid uncompromising opinion you think I have of him, I'm rooting for him, and I hope he comes back as early as possible. But if/when he does come back, I want him to show a hungry spirit and some drive to play in the NHL - which he has not displayed so far in his career - because believe it or not that drive at the end of the day translates towards his on-ice demeanor and play.
  6. KHL and NHL are very different leagues, especially for Dmen. Size of the ice, skill/speed of the forwards, systems, decision making etc. so KHL all-star doesn't mean much if he can't translate it to the NA game and it's not a foregone conclusion that he can. Quick and good decision making is a tricky one to figure out. He definitely wasn't a top 4 player when he was playing here, but here's hoping he can become that. The point is that making contractual demands like an AHL clause, or icetime demands when you have less than a season worth of games under your belt is a red flag. Granted I didn't consider waiver eligibility so it might be a moot point in that regard, but if he's threatening to wait it out for UFA status then trade his rights - if a team is willing to take a chance on him - without thinking twice. WD did screw up with him, there's no denying that but it doesn't mean there's 0 accountability on him as well. Show up to camp like you're ready to play in the NHL, and earn your minutes and the entire fanbase will stand behind you because we could use his skillset.
  7. haha it's alright, everything will be ok in the end.
  8. NTC is not a concern, what's more concerning is a no-AHL clause like last time. If I'm JB I wouldn't give it to him. It's not about whether or not he gets sent to the AHL, he'll likely stick in the NHL albeit with a learning curve, but he needs to know he's not entitled to anything before proving himself.
  9. Contending teams are usually strapped, so if they need it and to increase Eriksson's value and get a mid/late round pick back without having to take back a bad contract we might have to retain. No problem for us either way.
  10. We're seeing the faintest light at the end of the tunnel in Eriksson's contract, and people want to add one more year of Lucic to get rid of Eriksson. Lucic's contract is even worse than Eriksson's, smh at people who want to do a 1 to 1 swap. I got so excited at the idea of Lucic being a Canuck in the Sedin era, but he's done in the NHL. He can fight, that's it. Eriksson is still a 3rd liner, you do NOT want to pay that much money and term to a 4th liner in Lucic. We do need physical players, but Lucic is not a player anymore. There are plenty of other physical fish in the sea!
  11. Eriksson's contract isn't that terrible anymore, especially not after July 1st. It's still a bad contract but it's not as terrible. He's paid most of the money he's owed, he's producing at a third line rate while being defensively responsible and playing a shutdown role. He has a limited NTC, so there's some flexibility there and I have a feeling he won't block too many trades since he's looking for a change of scenery. Retain salary on his contract for the next 3 years and suddenly you might be able to get a mid-late round pick for him from a contending team in need of depth and veteran leadership. Eriksson at 3-4 million is right there in value for what he's providing. It's not such a stretch anymore for a GM to take a chance on him if the Canucks retain salary.
  12. Didn't know he was an Ontario guy. RIP
  13. Rangers have a very smooth skating RHD prospect in Joey Keane. I've been a fan of his for a while. Very smooth skater, responsible defensively but will jump on offense when the opportunity without forcing the issue. He's a victim of depth for RHD in the Rangers system behind DeAngelo, Pionk, Shattenkirk and now Fox. I'd definitely take a chance on him. To NYR: Brisebois To VAN: Keane
  14. I wanted him on the Canucks for so long. He would have been that missing element we were craving for during the Sedin era. But now with where he's at in his career I don't think I can get behind a trade for him. I'd much rather Eriksson. Eriksson is slow but not Lucic slow. If Lucic was making 4th line money then I'd be all over that but he's got term and a NMC which means expansion protection - no go for me.
  15. Lee is good too. I think we could use his leadership on our team and he would probably fit well on a line with Petey and Boeser. On paper anyways...