canuckistani

Members
  • Content count

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Neutral

About canuckistani

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Recent Profile Visitors

787 profile views
  1. [Report] Canucks trying to Sign Trymakin

    tryamkin is listed as a left-shooting defenseman and so is Pedan. Doesn't make sense to have them paired up- defensemen require a lot of maturity and experience playing their off-side.  
  2. Benning Talking To Media

    Benning saw a roster player (Prust) being able to replace a player who had talent but was on a one-way ticket to alcoholics anonymous and out of a roster spot (Kassian). I'd make that trade too. It doesnt matter that Prust was/is a plug. A plug who is going to play is a better option than a talented kid who has too much off-ice issues to be a successful AHL-er, let alone NHL-er.  
  3. Getting into a bit of a hypothetical here, but please hear me out: Sedins are signed for another 2 years at 7 million per year cap hit. Now, say in 2 years, when the Sedins are going to be 37, they wan to sign a 2 year contract. Lets assume that their last season (i.e., 2017-18) gives something like 10-20 goals and 40-50 points in a full season for each twin. What would that be worth ?   My shot in the dark would be, in the case of a 40-50 point season at age 37, a 2-year contract would yield 4.5 - 5 million/year range.  
  4. I really like this team. Even though Demeitra played for a very short time with us (unfortunate incident !), he was one of the best players to play for the Canucks and his ripper from the dot is easily superior to/better than any barring Bure to've played for the team. Not too sure of the Burrows-Cassels-Samuellson like though, it's a traversity that a plenary like Samuellson can be left out but i am just not liking him in the 4th line role.   
  5. keep hamhuis

    I think keeping Hamhuis is a positive idea, if and only if we end up trading one of Sbisa or Edler.  The reason is this: we need to free up some room in the Left Defense position. For the next year, we will most likely have Edler, Sbisa, Hutton, Pedan (and if wildest dreams come true, Tryamkin). That is already 5 for a slot of 3. Realistically speaking, our needs are more in the Right Defense position, with Tanev being the only sure-shot to make the team next year and Biega being servicable as a 3rd pairing D-man, seeing 30-40 games/season. Plus there is the price tag. Hamhuis would have to accept a 2/2.5 million/year cap to leap-frog some of these guys in the 'bang for his buck' pecking order.  
  6.   Yes, got to say, Horvat's value is being massively under-projected here. True, he plays like a very young 'okay 3C with bursts/streches of top 2C level play for several games'. But that is beyond the point here.  Horvat was projected as the most complete player of his draft. Not the most offensively gifted or the skills-gifted guy. His thing is, he has no real glaring weaknesses but no real super-showy skills either- no 'amazing shot/sick acceleration/crazy stick handling'. But on the other hand, he is, realistically speaking, not 'bad or below average' in any single category either: as a  skater, he is above average, so is he as a passer, zone coverage, etc. His weakest links are, he is not super-strong yet, so gets outmuscled a bit more often than optimal. That will come with time. He is a player, who's ceiling, realistically, is somewhere in the Patrice Bergeron (IMO, best case scenario) to David Backes (more realistic ceiling) type of a player. He is someone i can see steadily climbing in points and maintaining a 55-65 point average through his mid 20s and early thirties, while killing penalties, winning face-offs at a good clip, etc.  That IMO, is a more fair assessment of Horvat and TBH, it puts him in the Drouin + R1 pick status, at the very least. Most likely a Drouin + R1 + R2 for a Horvat + R6 kinda deal.  
  7.   Actually Sutter has a massively hidden potential: it was brief,but he can beautifully complement the Sedins: provide a RH draw to cover for Henrik's critical weak side draws, is a natural righty, sort of gets the cycle game (he cycles, is just not that good at it yet) but above all, has the Burrows-esque tendency to 'make the pass, try to get open in front of the net for amazing pass and snap in' with them too. Its unlikely, but if Vey, Henrik, Horvat keeps trucking along and the Vey-Cracknell fight for the 4C job heats up, Bennings might just say 'change of plans, you are a RW now for an awesome 1st line pairing'.  
  8. You are better off Peddling Burrows and Higgins to a team like New Jersey or Arizona, since :   a) they have the cap-space b ) both teams have a ton of expiring contracts at the end of the season ( NJ has 12 roster spots signed for 2016-17, Arizona has 10)  And that too, is a bad contract being ditched, so we'd have to do something like Burrows + Higgins + 3rd round 2016 for a 2nd round draft pick or something of that sort.  
  9. Jake Virtanen Talk

    Horvat got utilized more than Virtanen- he averaged more than two minutes per game than Virtanen in his rookie season. Plus, Horvat to be fair, was projected to make an easier transition to the NHL, since he was seen as a player with good allround skills and hockey IQ. This has mostly borne out, where Horvat just needs to get a bit stronger and more experienced to be a 2C typer performer. Virtanen on the other hand, has a lot of raw power and decent shot, with a lower level of game-sense than Horvat had. This is obvious, from seeing Jake play. What he needs, is exposure in the type of scenarios that he is not getting in the NHL: ability to play alongside top end playmakers and ability to play important minutes- such as a power play with the clock winding down, etc. These are the abilities he is not able to hone here and in my humble opinion, he needs to do this, before we end up typecasting him as a speedy, muscular power forward with decent hands but not playing an offensive game.   
  10. Jake Virtanen Talk

    I disagree, because we are projecting JV to be a potential 1st/2nd line right-winger. Had he been projected as a 3rd/4th line right-winger, it'd be perfectly fine letting him being in the NHL and learning on the fly. But the point is, his offensive game is NOT going to develop here, because he simply won't get the opportunity to hone those skills. All skills are 'use it or lose it' kind of skills. You cannot expect a player who gets zero PP time for 3-4 years to suddenly turn into a PP monster, or someone who never plays with finesse oriented centers (which is what all first line centers are- finesse oriented. Big or small, they all got finesse and skills) to suddenly play like he is anticipating a killer feed.  If JV plays on in the NHL, he will end up being a third/fourth liner. Because his physical game is effective, coaches will focus more and more on his defensive zone positioning, his ability to hit will be harnessed into a sandpaper and abrasion role, which will mean he will eventually end up with a ceiling similar to Raffi Torres and not Milan Lucic.   For JV to develop into a potential Milan Lucic, he needs to play top line minutes, top PP unit, etc. The only place he can play that, is in the juniors right now and IMO he needs more time developing as a 1st/2nd line offensively gifted power forward rather than a bone crunching power forward with limited offensive upside, which is what he is likely to become in the NHL without proper offensive minutes(which he won't get with the canucks).  
  11. What happens when Sutter comes back?

    Sedins-Sutter Baer-Horvat-Hansen Prust-McCann-Vrby Burrows-Cracknell-Dorsett/Etem   *I know it was a while ago, but i liked the look of the Sedans-Sutter line.  ** With Baer-Horvat finding chemistry, its time to put Hansen back on that line, where he also had very good chemistry with Horvat and will help a lot in Horvat being a 2-way defenseman than mostly forced to being a rookie 'shutdown only'.  *** Prust-McCann-Vrby will be a decent scoring line IMO with some grit thrown in. **** Burrows-Cracknell would be a good sandpaper line alongside Dorsett/Etem.  
  12. [Proposal] Trade with Phoenix ?

      Err, obviously, if Arizona is not in playoffs, this is a horrible trade for them. But i should remind you, that Arizona is currently the safest team from the Pacific, after LA, in the playoff picture. Its still close, but they are at 44 points from 41 games, fighting against Vancouver (42 in 42G), Anaheim (41 in 41 games), SJ ( 40 in 39) and Calgary ( 40 in 40).  They actually have the best chance after LA currently to sneak into the playoffs. And they have a good shot at progressing to R2 of playoffs too, given that they will most likely face one of Anaheim, SJ or Calgary in Round 1.  So where i am coming from, is Arizona is not in a position to contend for Matthews or Puljojaarvi in the first place. They are more realistically in the hunt for DeBrincat/Keller/Jost/Bean type of a player- players who are NOT going to be franchise hall of famers, but good to serviceable NHL players after 1-2 years of work in the minors. 
  13. [Proposal] Trade with Phoenix ?

    I agree that Burrows, Higgins are overpaid. At combined 7 million dollars, they are not worth it. But at combined say 4.5 or 5 million dollars, they are good value for money.  you are right, Arizona is rebuilding but nobody wants an Edmonton-esque rebuild: where you have a glut of highly talented forwards with nobody but 4th line fighters and journeyman AHL-ers to lead them. One needs a good balance between a vet core and a young lineup to rebuild. Plus as i mentioned, Arizona has only 10 players signed for next year. They have 9 pending UFAs and 6 pending RFAs. no doubt Arizona will like to sign some of them back but currently, Arizona need to replace a lot of those contracts and fast.   I just wondered if teams like New Jersey/Arizona would prefer to trade away a 1st round pick for 2-3 veteran core with a lower tier pick tossed in ( do you not think the 2017 R2 is worth anything at all ?), when they are a team on the rebuild, with tons of capspace available for next season ( both NJ and Arizona will have close to 40 million of cap space come July 2016) and already have tons of talented ELC players trying to break in.   Also, its not like Arizona would be giving up on Auston Matthews or Puljojaarvi, they are in a comfortable spot for the playoffs, so they would be giving up a #15-20 type of a guy, who is most likely going to be a 1-2 year project before being a consistent NHL performer.  
  14. [Proposal] Trade with Phoenix ?

    I already mentioned the reasons: Burrows & Higgins are not playoff liability in the bottom six, Arizona is in the playoff picture and desperately needs a strong playoff run to make money in a financially struggling franchise. Plus Arizona has a glut of young ELC contracts coming through the system, with a huge gaping hole in their lineup ( lots of expiring contracts). Logically, what Arizona needs,is some proven veteran power in the bottom six while filling the top six with young peaking & fresh talent, while getting into the playoffs.  Arizona needs a #17-18 draft pick a heck of a lot less than they need some bodies to buffer their playoff run and a few vets to smooth out the kinks for next season. 
  15. Phoenix is currently sitting pretty in the playoff picture (2nd in the division at the moment, with a 4 point lead with 2 games in hand over us, at 3rd). However, looking a bit deeper, while we CAN be crossed by Anaheim, Calgary and San Jose ( all three have games on hand over us), Phoenix still is in the playoff picture at #2 in the division. A trade with Phoenix can help both the teams : Phoenix desperately needs to generate greater fan following and is the team that needs a deep-ish  playoff run ( ideal case scenario for Phoenix would be a long Divisions final series).  Now, Phoenix has a ton of cap-space ( they have just over $11 million in free cap space) and they have a team that has a ton of contracts expiring( Phoenix is committed to only 10 players and $33 million cap-hit for the next season) :  Players like Doan may retire, players like Boyd Gordon, Grossman, Steve Downie, etc. may not even come back and some of them are not worth the contract they are on. As such, do you think Arizona goes for a trade like this :   To Arizona: Chris Higgins ( 2.5 M) + Alex Burrows (4.5 million) + Matt Bartkowski ( 1.75 million) + 2017 R2  ( Total cap- hit 8.75 million)   To Vancouver: 2016 R1   Is such a trade reasonable ?   Pros for Vancouver : Cap dump, get a late first rounder as a pick, rebuild via draft and free-agency Pros for Arizona: Burrows & Higgins are good players to have in the playoffs, as their defensive aspect of the game mostly makes them a 'cant hurt the team when they are out most of the time' kind of 3rd/4th line players. Plus they are veterans and along with Antoine Vermette, Brad Richardson and Martin Hanzal can form a 'tough, smart & defensively responsible veteran core' for a glut of new players coming into the roster. Plus Bartkowski is a servicable defenceman in the playoffs and offer defensive depth to the Coyotes, who are thin on the blue line. The 2nd round pick in 2017 can also add for a further compensation to the pick in 2016 and possibility of Bartkowski not signing on.