Ilya Mikheyev Posted February 4, 2013 Author Share Posted February 4, 2013 Pretty much agree. The Manny/Fehr swap is loss. The Raymond/Brouwer move is a lateral swap, both bring different things. But I think we have what Brouwer brings, so I don't see it as a terrible need. Although if we had Brouwer and the proposal was to bring Raymond in, perhaps we would say the same thing, this is really just a case of being more comfortable with what you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I think you're forgetting what Raymond looks like when he isn't 'on' in the playoffs. He's not creating chances, he's shooting wide and giving the other team a chance. Even on the famous Raymond - Wellwood - Bernier line, he was the least productive of the 3. He may be playing with a rookie and Weise, but Schroeder has looked better than both if we're talking stats aside. Big bodies who can play is a key to winning the cup in regards to all the different teams (basically) since the lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted February 4, 2013 Author Share Posted February 4, 2013 Actually the key to winning the cup is goaltending. Everyone thinks we were physically destroyed by Boston, but the truth is we probably out hit them just as much as they out hit us, they dominated us after the whistles. Nothing more. And since then we have only improved our physicality. We are equating Raymond of now too much with Raymond of 11/12. He is far more like the 09/10 Raymond than any other Raymond he has been. I do agree Schroeder has looked very good, but in Brouwer's role I think he could still do more. Or on the flip side, in Raymonds role I think Brouwer would do less. Raymond has been fine this year, we need a good balance of skill and physicality, Not one more slanted than the other. Our offense has failed not our physicality, and Raymond addresses offense more. Raymond has been just fine this year, I don't see any reason to make a change unless it adds a component to the team that we don't currently have, Brouwer doesn't do that. If you see the deal as that way then you still see Raymond as the what he was last year, that's fine thats your opinion. I disagree, watching him you can see he is a much better player, using his speed much more effectively. Last year's Raymond? No, but I am willing to bet teams would be willing to give the 09/10 Raymond that, maybe more. And Raymond looks alot more like that guy then the bad Raymond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punjabi7 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I dont understand why people want to keep Manny. All he is good for is winning the faceoff. We want to keep a guy who cannot hit or score, but because he can win faceoffs. He is no force on the line, instead lets get a center who can hit, fight, and stick up for the team... I cant believe we want to keep Manny for faceoff, Lappy is good there as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Sorry man, but I think turning 'Raymond' into different 'Raymonds' is really grasping at straws. Everything should be accounted, not just the way he has played over the last 6-7 games. The Canucks may have 'hit' as much as Boston did, but that doesn't mean the Canucks were not physically dominated. For example, a Lucic hit is probably more impactful than a Martin St.Louis (.. or Mase Raymond) hit. Having big bodies is more key. Goaltending is important, but the Canucks already have that.. Also the question again: if you were GMMG would you sign Raymond to a 11 million/3 year deal?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_devil Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Raymond wil be traded sometime this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted February 4, 2013 Author Share Posted February 4, 2013 No, but that's not a fair comparison. Would you have signed Brouwer to that deal at the end of 08/09? Not likely. It's just not a fair comparison, the comparison should be what they are worth after they played there best, we have seen what Brouwer's is with that deal, and Raymond was worth that too earlier, luckily for us he took a discount, but I am willing to bet market value for May Ray after his best season would have been around the same. I guess this comes down to opinion. Raymond is much better than what he was last year. To suggest he isn't better than what he was over the last 2 season's is grasping at straws. Yes it is a small sample size, but just watching him you can tell he is a better player. And far more confident. For me the reason in not making the move is we have already addressed that component, we need our team to be able to play all styles, If this deal addressed something we don't have, I'm all for it, but it doesn't and with the way Raymond has been playing it seems to take away from an area of historical need, and adding to an area which we already are strong in. But Really this Raymond vs Brouwer thing comes down to personal opinion so we can just agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I dont understand why people want to keep Manny. All he is good for is winning the faceoff. We want to keep a guy who cannot hit or score, but because he can win faceoffs. He is no force on the line, instead lets get a center who can hit, fight, and stick up for the team... I cant believe we want to keep Manny for faceoff, Lappy is good there as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Thought this was going to be a Luongo deal. I'm going to say no, Manny for Fehr is a loss for us IMO, Fehr is the better player, but Manny fits our roster more, we need a very good faceoff man, and Manny is the best in the NHL. Brouwer is a great physical player with some offensive flare aswell, and in a swap for Raymond wouldn't stockpile unnecessary wingers, which is something I like. But our issue in the playoffs has been scoring, our secondary scoring has been non-existent. Now that Raymond has found his form, and found significant chemistry with Schroeder. I don't think he is someone we should move, as he adds key secondary scoring. We have gotten bigger and more physical, I think we are fine in that department now. We need to score and Raymond brings more offense than Troy. Equal deal value wise, just don't think it suits our team personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magikal Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Wow, one of the few times on CDC where a proposal isn't completely lopsided. Well done. I don't see Manny going anywhere but the idea of a Raymond for Brouwer deal is actually something I really like. Troy is someone i've always thought would be great for our 3rd line. A little fine tuning and I could see it being a possible deal for both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 We're not talking about the past right now. This isn't the past. This is a trade I am suggesting for today. The fact that Raymond has 1 ES G and 2 PPGs in a span of 2 games & 6 games without a single point doesn't not make him a secondary offensive threat. Brouwer when he's not scoring he's still grinding, getting players off their game, hitting, fighting, putting pressure on the goalie on the PP, etc. When Raymond isn't scoring he's a useful PKer. The Canucks don't need help in that area, the Caps do. Brouwer's value NOW > Raymond's value NOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 Wow, one of the few times on CDC where a proposal isn't completely lopsided. Well done. I don't see Manny going anywhere but the idea of a Raymond for Brouwer deal is actually something I really like. Troy is someone i've always thought would be great for our 3rd line. A little fine tuning and I could see it being a possible deal for both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Yeah, always hard for a 'perfect' deal .. fine tuning always needed. Thanks. Well, this trade is about Brouwer's value now vs. Raymond's value now... Brouwer has 1 less P goal and 1 more point than Raymond so far this year. So neither player is more of a secondary threat or less of one. Anyway, I can feel this is about to go in circles. Thank you for your input! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossram Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Raymond for Brouwer as a basis for a trade might work out. We get more grit and the Caps need to find a way to get more creative and score goals. Even if Manny's role is diminished, I think we need him just for faceoffs honestly. And I can't see where Fehr would fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 "I think our physicality issues were overrated?" Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager... You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah? Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot! Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored. Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back. Raymond has been playing alot better than he has over the last two years. And Raymond does bring more offense, he has a higher skill level, if you needed a top 6 forward (say both were on the 3rd) You would probably choose Raymond. And I don't think Brouwer is a need, I think our physicality issues were overrated, but that aside we did improve physically by alot. I don't see it as an issue, our issue is offense, executing and coaching/systems. And those 1st 2 are areas in which Raymond is better IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferlands_Head Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 ] "I think our physicality issues were overrated?" Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager... You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah? Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot! Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored. Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 "I think our physicality issues were overrated?" Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager... You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah? Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot! Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored. Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Semi recently, we became a cup contending team when we iced a big, physical and fast 3rd line of Manny between Torres and Hansen. It was capable of taking on any and all comers as the top defensive stopper line, including lines like Getzlaf/Perry/Ryan ahead of Kesler's line. Last year our 3rd line had a scoring presence instead behind the puck distribution and scoring wizardry of Cody Hodgson. Even then, that was scrapped, in part, to ensure we could ice that physically imposing defensive 3rd line which was viewed as key. For all the support Schroeder gets on CDC, he is neither generating any offence like CoHo nor capable of lining up for a defensive draw against, say, Joe Thornton? Ultimately when Booth and Kesler return, the logical 3rd line looks like; Higgins/Schroeder/Hansen Anybody want to bet we don't go to play off's with that as a defensive statement??? And even at that Raymond is currently out playing Higgins. Hey, speed to burn if we play Schroeder between Hansen & Raymond but combined they don't add up to the weight of Dustin Byfuglien or most twigs. . ] I agree on the physicality issues being overrated... The first game against Anaheim was a case of the team not being prepared to play. The sharks are a big physical team but It didn't do them any good against the Canucks in the 2011 playoffs. They were even bigger up front that year with Heatley in the lineup but were almost swept. I don't know why you included Chicago there, we are definitely bigger AND more physical than the Blackhawks, they just have a lot of highly skilled players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartyTimeWithJeffCarter Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Raymond wil be traded sometime this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted February 6, 2013 Author Share Posted February 6, 2013 Raymond for Brouwer as a basis for a trade might work out. We get more grit and the Caps need to find a way to get more creative and score goals. Even if Manny's role is diminished, I think we need him just for faceoffs honestly. And I can't see where Fehr would fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.