Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* - - - - 2 votes

Is Jordan Shroeder's Time in Vancouver Done?


  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#1 Pasific Coluseum

Pasific Coluseum

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:14 AM

It is pertinent imo to use him as trade bait for a skilled depth D or C for playoff run I advocate Gillis to pull the trigger! How many times has Shroeder been sent up and down up and down? Come playoffs I do not think Jordan will be a factor especially because of the increased physicality. He is small and doesn't look like an everyday NHLer. Playing on the 4th line isn't helping his cause to becoming a point producer. He's been given PP time and lots of games to showcase his talents. Drafted in 2010 he still has struggled mightily to maintain a NHL roster spot.

I think Jordan Shroeder's tenure as a Canuck is all but done. If he goes to a team like the Isles he may find an offensive spark.

Shroeder & Ballard for Visnovsky, Reasoner & 3rd 2013 might be worth looking considering
  • 0

#2 Gooseberries

Gooseberries

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,629 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:22 AM

It is pertinent imo to use him as trade bait for a skilled depth D or C for playoff run I advocate Gillis to pull the trigger! How many times has Shroeder been sent up and down up and down? Come playoffs I do not think Jordan will be a factor especially because of the increased physicality. He is small and doesn't look like an everyday NHLer. Playing on the 4th line isn't helping his cause to becoming a point producer. He's been given PP time and lots of games to showcase his talents. Drafted in 2010 he still has struggled mightily to maintain a NHL roster spot.

I think Jordan Shroeder's tenure as a Canuck is all but done. If he goes to a team like the Isles he may find an offensive spark.

Shroeder & Ballard for Visnovsky, Reasoner & 3rd 2013 might be worth looking considering

he was sent down at the beginning. Of season for cap reasons so we wouldn't have to waive ebbett. Gillis had no intention of him reporting to Chicago as he was recalled the next day. As for his opportunities as of late, I don't think you can classify manning the blue line on an 0/23 pp or playing in between sestito and weise on the fourth line grand Oppertunities. I like his play but the way av has been playing him his value is probably next to nothing on the market. Keeping schredder is probably going to be our best option for the time being unless another team is interested in him.

I wish him best of luck and a short stint in chi town
  • 0

20u7nh3.jpg

Credit to Vintage Canuck

The Sig lord


#3 Kevin Biestra

Kevin Biestra

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,869 posts
  • Joined: 31-October 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:29 AM

Gotta say, I'm getting a Jason King / Sergei Shirokov vibe here...
  • 4
Posted ImagePosted Image


Biestra speaks. Biestra educates.

Let Canucks management know you want King Richard Brodeur in the Ring of Honour with no further delay! He's been retired for 25 years!

http://forum.canucks...e-king-richard/

#4 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,756 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:42 AM

It is pertinent imo to use him as trade bait for a skilled depth D or C for playoff run I advocate Gillis to pull the trigger! How many times has Shroeder been sent up and down up and down? Come playoffs I do not think Jordan will be a factor especially because of the increased physicality. He is small and doesn't look like an everyday NHLer. Playing on the 4th line isn't helping his cause to becoming a point producer. He's been given PP time and lots of games to showcase his talents. Drafted in 2010 he still has struggled mightily to maintain a NHL roster spot.

I think Jordan Shroeder's tenure as a Canuck is all but done. If he goes to a team like the Isles he may find an offensive spark.

Shroeder & Ballard for Visnovsky, Reasoner & 3rd 2013 might be worth looking considering


I would agree that Schroeder will likely not be with the Canucks for the long term, however, this is not the deal which would move him.

1,) The extra $2 million in cap hit (for this season) argues against this deal.

2.) The team certainly gets a lot older, and not necessarily better.

3.) I don't see Reasoner being a huge upgrade over Schroeder in the lack of physicality. True, Reasoner is a bit bigger. Schroeder has more offensive upside than what Reasoner has shown over his career. I think the team could find someone better for the price you are suggesting.

4.) Visnovsky might be nice to have, but I do not see him staying around after this season (too high a cap hit, and he will likely want more term than Gillis will be willing to offer).

So the trade is: a good d-man (perhaps with some issues) and a talented, but small, young center for two guys who won't be here next season. As I see it, all the Canucks get out of this is that they move Ballard's contract (which isn't that bad) and they get the hope that Visnovsky can help the power play.

Schroeder could extend his time here if he could learn to play wing. Previous attempts to try him there have not gone well.

regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 13 March 2013 - 04:49 AM.

  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#5 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:46 AM

didn't see a "Is ebbett done with the Canucks " thread when he went down. Now every time a player is sent down we start a new thread as to whether or not that play is done with the club?
  • 0

#6 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,055 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:48 AM

*
POPULAR

It is pertinent imo to use him as trade bait for a skilled depth D or C for playoff run I advocate Gillis to pull the trigger! How many times has Shroeder been sent up and down up and down? Come playoffs I do not think Jordan will be a factor especially because of the increased physicality. He is small and doesn't look like an everyday NHLer. Playing on the 4th line isn't helping his cause to becoming a point producer. He's been given PP time and lots of games to showcase his talents. Drafted in 2010 he still has struggled mightily to maintain a NHL roster spot.

I think Jordan Shroeder's tenure as a Canuck is all but done. If he goes to a team like the Isles he may find an offensive spark.

Shroeder & Ballard for Visnovsky, Reasoner & 3rd 2013 might be worth looking considering


Then what makes you think he has any trade value? You have him written off at 22. Both age and NHL games played.

Edited by Baggins, 13 March 2013 - 04:48 AM.

  • 7
Posted Image

#7 DeltaSwede

DeltaSwede

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,432 posts
  • Joined: 01-August 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 05:19 AM

He certainly has got the potential to become a decent 2nd liner if he ever does get a proper showing with a team. However, there is a reason that teams passed on him during the draft and he hasn't proven them wrong yet.

I really liked what I was seeing when he showed glimpses of a very good two way game and I think there is room for development still. I say we hold on to this one.

Sure you can use him as trade bait and get an asset back but what could he fetch?
  • 0

MMjJiLv.gif

 

Shinckarukak

 


#8 hockeywoot

hockeywoot

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:08 AM

More wait and see.
If he can prove his worth he'll be around.
To do that, he'll need to score...ALOT more.
I also think he'll need to convert to wing to have a role in the NHL.

People had doubts about Kadri, but at least he was lighting up the AHL fairly consistently.

I don't think he will be here in the long-term (at I doubt MG is banking on it)
  • 0

#9 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,656 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:20 AM

the kid's career potential, ironically, is basically being an andrew ebbett.
  • 3

#10 ghjffbali

ghjffbali

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Joined: 08-May 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:29 AM

I don't know if he has a long-term future, but I don't think he's done just yet.
  • 0

#11 kylecanuck

kylecanuck

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:33 AM

Schroeder has got potential and is going to be better than what we've seen. Is he being given the opportunity to be better, well that's up for debate.

I say if someone come knocking that we trade Jim for a better return. We have Gaunce coming through the system with more upside, I don't see Gaunce being under Schroeder on the depth chart as of next season.

Schroeder is tradeable but only for the right return, probably our best prospect option for shipping out.
  • 0
The children, wont someone please think of the children!!!

#12 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,843 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:54 AM

Never,ever trade your best prospects unless it is a ridiculous return.
Schroeder is in a learning curve.Nobody knows if he becomes a third liner or second liner at this stage.
  • 0

#13 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,656 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:55 AM

Schroeder has got potential and is going to be better than what we've seen. Is he being given the opportunity to be better, well that's up for debate.

I say if someone come knocking that we trade Jim for a better return. We have Gaunce coming through the system with more upside, I don't see Gaunce being under Schroeder on the depth chart as of next season.

Schroeder is tradeable but only for the right return, probably our best prospect option for shipping out.


jordan schroeder's value was at its peak the day he was drafted, when he fell from a top 10 pick to wherever the canucks got him in the 20s. if teams didn't want him then, they definitely don't want him now after 4 years of proving them right.

at most he would get a 4th rounder in return.
  • 1

#14 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:31 AM

The only thing imo between Schroeder and a long NHL career is "attitude" You can't be his size and not bring "nasty" with you for the journey...........if he wants to see how it goes look at Marchand. (although he is an extreme example)

Over here we have the complex of the "wee man" Guys who because they are small develop a hard ruthless chip on the shoulder approach which makes them ultra competitive. Schroeder is not actually small but he is in NHL terms and so he needs to develop a hard, gritty edge................................ It takes guts but it tends to work.......he will get more space.

Schroeder came up and just assumed if he worked hard things would fall into place. But the people he is playing against are big, skilful men, men who will shove you about if they can and Schroeder's output gradually spiralled down as the realisation of what his size meant amongst the top players sunk in.

He was being hurried, pushed and balked by physically superior opponents. He needs taken aside and have it explained to him.............play "bigger" or settle for the AHL.

Edited by Bodee, 13 March 2013 - 07:39 AM.

  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#15 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:34 AM

Sadly, yes I think he is done with us.

The small size of Shroeder limited him to one single role: Sniper. If he cannot be a sniper, he is not useful to us. He can never play that grinder role that AV loves. That means he cannot play in our top 6 nor our bottom 6.

Remember that this guy is smaller than Patrick Kane. And everyone is saying that Patrick Kane is tiny.

And the goals he scored aren't all that impressive, to be honest. These aren't goals that "only" he could have scored.







Now of course Shroeder aren't Patrick Kane. I don't expect him to be. But fact is unless he is somewhat that good, the Canucks doesn't have room for him due to how stacked we are. His size limited his role to sniper only, that's the problem. Come playoff time there will be even less room for guys like him to move, unless he is Patrick Kane good.

He is like Steve Kariya, 2013 edition. Hack Steve Kariya got more points in less games, and still didn't make it.

Shroeder will be better off on a weaker team that can put him on top 6. I think he can become a 0.6 PPG type of guy playing a top 6 role. I don't see him succeeding with the Canucks.

Edited by CHIPS, 13 March 2013 - 07:52 AM.

  • 0

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#16 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,524 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:34 AM

the kid's career potential, ironically, is basically being an andrew ebbett.


AV wold slap you silly for even comparing Schroeder to the great Andrew Ebbett!
  • 0

#17 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:48 AM

didn't see a "Is ebbett done with the Canucks " thread when he went down. Now every time a player is sent down we start a new thread as to whether or not that play is done with the club?


Ebbett is a 4th liner and that's his role. So actually his job is more secure. Shroeder is a potential top 6 player on a very stacked team that doesn't have room for him. Neither does he fit this team's (AV's) style.

Edited by CHIPS, 13 March 2013 - 07:49 AM.

  • 0

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#18 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 07:57 AM

jordan schroeder's value was at its peak the day he was drafted, when he fell from a top 10 pick to wherever the canucks got him in the 20s. if teams didn't want him then, they definitely don't want him now after 4 years of proving them right.

at most he would get a 4th rounder in return.


Not to mention that year (2009) was a terrible draft year. That makes dropping to rank 22 even worst. That means he would have been a 2nd rounder in a good draft year.

http://en.wikipedia....NHL_Entry_Draft

That said, we could have gotten Ryan O'Reilly. (sad panda)
  • 0

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#19 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:00 AM

Never,ever trade your best prospects unless it is a ridiculous return.
Schroeder is in a learning curve.Nobody knows if he becomes a third liner or second liner at this stage.


He is not our top prospect. Nicklas Jensen is.
  • 0

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#20 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,524 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:01 AM

Never,ever trade your best prospects unless it is a ridiculous return.
Schroeder is in a learning curve.Nobody knows if he becomes a third liner or second liner at this stage.


Considering we are talking about Jordan Schroeder, does anyone else find it depressing that he is one of our best prospects? What does that say about the state of Canucks drafting and development?

Nothing against the kid but the Canucks need to overhaul their scouting staff......so many missed players in the 2nd and later rounds they should have known something about. How does Chicago end up with so many Vancouver born players? How does VAN continually ignore the WHL?

Edited by wallstreetamigo, 13 March 2013 - 08:06 AM.

  • 0

#21 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,066 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:02 AM

Hopefully MG dangles that hook and another GM bites.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#22 WZRD

WZRD

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,211 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:09 AM

He won't develop properly under AV. Hodgson's happy to be out and Kassian probably wants out too.
  • 0

Posted Image


#23 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,214 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

Not quite. He needs to dominate the AHL first. Of he does, then he'll be a sure fire NHLer.

But it would help all our prospects if the Canucks controlled their own farm team.

Can't wait until they take over Abbotsford.
  • 0
Posted Image

#24 kylecanuck

kylecanuck

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:15 AM

jordan schroeder's value was at its peak the day he was drafted, when he fell from a top 10 pick to wherever the canucks got him in the 20s. if teams didn't want him then, they definitely don't want him now after 4 years of proving them right.

at most he would get a 4th rounder in return.



Fourth rounder, that I doubt but it's a possibility. Who says he needs to be traded straight across for someone, or a pick? He is young with the potential of upside so he is somewhat desirable I would imagine. I don't think we should trade him for anything less than a second, or a part of a package that nets us a bigger return.

Who knows, the kids got potential, maybe he will become the next grabner?
  • 0
The children, wont someone please think of the children!!!

#25 DooBie604

DooBie604

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:27 AM

Only CDC would write off a 22 year old player after about 20 NHL games under his belt. Remember when everyone said we should trade Cody after his first stint in the NHL saying he's a bust and then he gets traded and the same people cry about how we gave him up and now want JS traded after 20 games. It's like some sort of moronic vicious cycle.

People here say AV doesn't give prospects a chance but if CDC was the coach or GM every rookie we ever had would have been traded within the first 25 NHl games of their career.
  • 3

#26 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,162 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 13 March 2013 - 08:33 AM

Gotta say, I'm getting a Jason King / Sergei Shirokov vibe here...

King and Shiro were completely different situations, never mind Schroeder being completely different from them.

King was getting time with the twins and doing well, but had a concussion in the AHL and then contract squabbles got in the way when he refused the qualifying offer. We traded his rights to get Ryan Shannon as King was playing overseas and in no hurry to get back.

Shiro's worry was defensive ability but in the games he was up, he was eventually dropped back down due to injuries with our defence as we needed to bring up someone to fill in. We had worries about him and if he'd be happy continuing some time in the AHL developing so we traded his rights before he bolted to Russia.

Schroeder has not been sent down and called up and down and up. He has been sent down after a few training camps, but that doesn't count. Other than that, he's only been called up the once this year and stuck with the team until recently being sent down to get top minutes. He wasn't doing as much offensively but his faceoff time was really limited at the end and we needed a center who could do more of that.

I guess I should expect that people don't really understand the history of this club and understand how it relates, but man that annoys me.

This is nothing to do with AV misusing players, or Schroeder being done in Vancouver. He may well end up in a trade as he's shown he can be very good in a number of areas on the ice, but he may also find a spot here to succeed. We won't trade him for the sake of trading him.
  • 2

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#27 TheWheeler

TheWheeler

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:06 AM

Can anyone tell me why he was not put back on the Raymond/Hansen line when Kesler got injured?

This is a question that has really been bugging me. Before Kesler came back, Raymond/Schroeder/Hansen was SO exciting to watch.
  • 0

#28 atillaMYhun

atillaMYhun

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:20 AM

*
POPULAR

Can anyone tell me why he was not put back on the Raymond/Hansen line when Kesler got injured?

This is a question that has really been bugging me. Before Kesler came back, Raymond/Schroeder/Hansen was SO exciting to watch.


Because AV makes poor decisions on a regular basis
  • 5

#29 hf44

hf44

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,208 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 08

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:43 AM

That said, we could have gotten Ryan O'Reilly. (sad panda)


Really, O'Reilly career numbers 242 games played, 41 goals, 70 assists. 111 points. Works out per season, 74 games, 13 goals, 21 assists and 34 points and you think he's worth 5 mil a season.
  • 0

#30 Papayas

Papayas

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,601 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 09

Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:49 AM

Hey, weren't you guys the one who said hodgson was done after his first season with us?


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.