Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Why does everyone seem to think we need more depth at C?


ThaBestPlaceOnEarth

Recommended Posts

Because just about every other SC contender has a better second line center(not counting Kesler) than the Canucks. And most of them are way better.

Canucks might be able to manage if 1. Kesler isn't out to long 2. He can stay healthy 3. Plays at the top of his game, something he has rarely done, in the playoffs then maybe the Canucks can win the cup. But honestly what are the chances all that happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think our centre depth will be perfect if Schroeder is able to come in and prove he belongs and can produce in the NHL. That way, we'll have our top 1-2 punch at centre of Sedin-Kesler, a young talented 3rd line centre who can anchor the 2nd line when necessary in Schroeder, and two gritty, defensive centres who are great on the PK on the 4th line in Malhotra and Lapierre.

Sedin

Kesler

Schroeder

Lapierre

Malhotra

^ That's very similar to Boston's centre core of Krejci, Bergeron, Seguin, Kelly and Campbell, except that Sedin is much better than Krejci.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nowhere in my post did I say Schroeder and Seguin are equal. I just did a breakdown of each team's centre depth charts. If you want to get nitpicky and compare each player:

Sedin >> Krejci

Kesler > Bergeron

Schroeder << Seguin

Malhotra = Kelly

Lapierre = Campbell

Oh, I forgot....

..... :picard:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. We need a center who can perform at Rich Peverley's level at the very least that can come in when either Henrik or Kesler is injured. Now, that could have been Cody Hodgson, but that ship has sailed. Either Jordan Schroeder is ready, or we need to acquire one through trade. That's why Tyler Bozak's name's getting thrown out there - because we need a guy like him.

The only way we have no problem at center is if Jordan Schroeder can step in right away and put up numbers like 42 in 57. Otherwise, we need to get someone like that.

As it stands, we have no depth at the top 6 center position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were not going to get someone who can preform at Rich Pevelery's level, that's somewhere inbetween Burrows or Higgins value, too much to pay for us right now. and I once again can't see how people can think Hodgson would have been here past the offseason even if we didn't trade him at the deadline.

As it stands we might have depth at the top 6 center position, Schroeder might be ready, and if Higgins can transition to the center ice spot well then those are potentially 2 good options. Which add to our "top 6 center depth". It's really all dependent on that, if those two can play their than we have some guys, if not we need to acquire someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

blah blah blah wait till after training camp at least to see what we have down the middle. We are trying something new with Kes out and everyone is jumping the gun. We have a bunch of guys who can play center, not at the level of kesler, but that's where team depth comes in.. everyone else on the team has to step up there games to flll the void, it's not like were just gonna throw a guy into a position an expect him to perform at the level of or out perform Kesler is it? I can't tell from these comments.

Fact is Kes is out, that doesn't mean our team needs to find kesler2.0 asap. we need someone who can play mistake free hockey for the mot part and get some points on the board, but we can't expect him to do it all himself can we? team effort gets us where we wanna be. Good thing the Canucks know that, even if everyone on CDC doesn't seem to get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schroeder might be ready for what? Second line duties on the President's Trophy winners? A raw rookie with zero games of NHL experience? I see.Well,at least the naked truth is coming ever closer than twenty pages of nonsense and hype from fan boys.

Take away Higgins and you have to fill his spot and he is not going to be a 2c,anyways.

Kesler is not showing signs he is coming back any time soon and nobody knows how effective he will be or how long it will take him to round into shape even if or when he comes back.

I expect Luongo to be traded for a prime time center ice man along with a right handed d man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm willing to try out Schroeder and assess him and the other options before jumping the gun.

I hope Schroeder can surprise and be ready.

It just irks me to see that some people have a grand delusion that we have no problem right now with our depth at center by comparing to teams like Boston who are one of the deepest in the NHL. We have a solid group of 4 centers, yes. But we do not have any depth at the top 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone thinks we need a new center because everyone is very anxious without Kesler around, people are afraid of how we'll perform without Kesler. After all Kesler is very talented and skilled, he could be a top line Center on many other teams. Without him, people are worried our scoring and our defense will falter. That is why I think everyone wants to get another center. The thing is when Kesler is back where does that Center go, if he plays wing where does the winger go and this chain leads all the way down to the fourth line. What are we going to do with Malhotra, Lapiere, Weise, Kassian, Ebbett, Schroeder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, Rich Peverley isn't anything special. He benefitted from the Bruins' white hot start last season when everyone was putting up points. It's kind of like how Raymond scored 25 goals and 53 points a few seasons ago, yet everyone calls him crap now. Sometimes a team is just white hot and everyone, even the depth guys, are piling up the points.

I don't really see the Bruins' bottom 6 centre depth as any different than that of the Canucks. Peverley, Kelly and Campbell pretty much = Higgins, Malhotra and Lapierre (I compare Higgins to Peverley because they're both wingers on their team that can fill in at centre in a pinch). The X-Factor for Boston is Seguin and no, the Canucks don't have anyone close but the Canucks' own X-Factor is Jordan Schroeder. How good can he be? He won't be nearly as good as Seguin, obviously, but can he contribute around 40 points and fill in admirably for Kesler?

Anyway, this isn't even about comparing Vancouver's centre depth to Boston's. I just chose Boston's centre depth chart to compare to Vancouver's depth chart and didn't intend to compare the abilities of each player individually. It just seems like they have the same kind of breakdown at centre: a skilled, playmaking top line centre (Krejci/Sedin), a Selke-calibre two-way 2nd line centre (Bergeron/Kesler), a veteran shutdown centre on the 3rd line (Kelly/Malhotra) and an above average, gritty 4th line centre with some untapped offensive ability (Campbell/Lapierre).

Just carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...