Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

2014 Nucks Makeover


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 24 March 2013 - 08:56 PM

Depending on what happens in the playoffs, most would agree the Nucks need a bit of a change next year.

We are still lacking the hands/size combination, aggressiveness/hitting, and hunger we need to win a cup. As such here are my thoughts (albeit challenging to do all of them) that could really turn us into a TOUGH team to play against, and one that's built for the playoff grind, and that can play any style.

Right now our 2014 cap is 60 million, it is expected to be 64 million so here are my views.

First things first

1.Ballard and Tostito (resign and trade) for Matt Martin and a 2nd round pick. isles will be desperate for dmen as many of theirs are aging and are ufas.

2. Do not re-sign Manny (known) and Ebbett and have to let Higgy go.

3. Lou and Booth for a young right shooting dman who can step in and a 1st.

4. Sign David Clarkson for 4.25 ml and Torres for 2.25, resign Raymond for a 3 ml cap hit (for three years)

This team will have size on every line. Someone who can score and hit with the Sedins (and take some pressure off Kassian and let him develop properly).Clarkson has size, uses it, can fight and will drop em, protect the Sedins and can score, has very good hands, good cycler and around the net/tough areas.

I don't think we'll need a third line center if Schroeds keeps developing and we add size througout the line up (size that uses its size). If Kesler gets hurt, with this line up we still have enough size on the wings to manage to win with a smaller center. Schroeds is looking like the real deal and needs to be given the oppty on the third now.

Move Kassian with Burr and Kesler. Size on that line, Burr can be the playmaker, that would be one annoying and tough line to play against.

Third line, issue for me here was I don't like a Mayray, Schroeder, Hansen line in the playoffs (lacking size). Signing and bringing back torres adds a new dynamic here. It provides a solid forcheck like Hansen but adds hitting, and size to handle playoff hockey.

Hansen drops to fourth and now we have a fourth AV loves. Lappy with Hansen can be two of the best shutdown players in the league, Martin brings a hitter like no other and this line will TIRE the HELL out of teams in the playoffs.

AV can now roll all four lines like he did in the run. I like the depth, the size, the toughness, and scoring ability. We still have Jensen in the minors as well as Gaunce as potential call ups.

Nothing drastic, but shows how a couple small changes can really change the dynamic, and size of this team


Line up.

Daniel Henrik Clarkson
6.1 / 6.1/ 4.25 = 16

Burrows Kelser Kassian
4.5 / 5/ .875 = 10.4

Raymond Schroeder Torres
3.0 / 1.25 / 2.25 = 6.5

Martin Lappiere Hansen

1 / 1.35 / 1.35 = 3.7


Hamhuis Garrison
4.5 / 4.6 = 9.1

Edler Tanev
5 / 2 = 7

Bieksa / New D
4.6 /1.5

Schnieds
4

Lack

.875

Total = 64 Mil

Edited by BuretoMogilny, 24 March 2013 - 09:07 PM.

  • 0

#2 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 24 March 2013 - 09:06 PM

Hansen on the 4th where he'll get like 12 mins a game? Clarkson isn't going to be so easy to acquire but I'd love to have him. I think Jensen can make the jump next year.
  • 0

#3 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 24 March 2013 - 09:11 PM

Hansen on the 4th where he'll get like 12 mins a game? Clarkson isn't going to be so easy to acquire but I'd love to have him. I think Jensen can make the jump next year.


Agree on Hansen but with these lines AV can go back to a 'more balanced' ice distribution. That 4th line will get alot of ice. Not sure Jensen is ready yet, we haven't seen him play much.

I think giving him a year in the AHL makes sense. Our issue is more getting rid of the 5'11 6-0 guys and bringing in a few 6-1, 6-2 210 lb players who hit and use their size.

Martin, Clarkson, Torres bring a dimension of grit and tenacity that fill out our line up and bring a better mix.
  • 0

#4 bobby loocid dreamer

bobby loocid dreamer

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 407 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 10

Posted 24 March 2013 - 10:48 PM

thanks for having some realistic cap hits. I feel like we need to give our top young talent some serious opportunity in a top 6 role. the twins are getting old and kesler is a band aid. Jensen and Gaunce and Rodin need to develop so we don't completely suck and have to totally rebuild when the twins retire.
  • 0
Go Batman!

#5 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 25 March 2013 - 10:56 AM

1.) I'm wondering if the Canucks might have to take back an extra contract/cap dump in the deal. The Islanders do have a lot of cap space, but it doesn't mean that they want to use it up. :)

I'm also thinking that Ballard could bring back more of a return than just Martin (a 4th line grinder) and a 2nd (although as it sits, it would be the 39th pick overall). Still, I see it as overpayment on the part of the Canucks, even if we factor in the $3 million cap dump by the Canucks in the deal as written.

2.) Higgins may well go on his own. He's probably being underpaid (by at least a few hundred thousand) of what he could have gotten elsewhere. And if your alternative to Higgins is Torres, then I would say keep Higgins.

3.) Any idea what team wants to give up a "young right shooting dman who can step in and a 1st" for Luongo and Booth? And who would this young d-man be? And for what year would this belong?

4.) Clarkson might be a good signing, and the Canucks might have to go as high as the salary you have suggested, but the guy has had some variable results over his career. How flexible is he as to where he can play? The team is getting a bit full on right wing with Burrows, Kassian and Hansen all over there. I'm not that familiar with Clarkson, so other than size, what does he bring to the first line and the Sedins? Can he play the type of cycle game of the Sedins?

I would prefer that the Canucks not re-sign Torres. And I certainly wouldn't re-sign him at that price.

I suspect that Raymond can be had for something less than the $3 million you are suggesting. I suspect that Gillis will be able to grind a home-town discount out of the guy because of all the loyalty he has shown Raymond these past two years. And, I think Raymond likes it here.

5.) Hansen on the 4th line is a waste of talent, especially if you're putting Torres ahead of him.

6.) Bieksa is a right side d-man. Why are you bringing in a right side d-man only to play Bieksa on the left? Garrison is a left side d-man, although he can play on the right side (but supposedly he is better on the left).

So, for your pairings the team could perhaps have Garrison, Edler and Hamhuis on the left side, and Bieksa, Tanev and "new guy" on the right.


regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 25 March 2013 - 11:14 AM.

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

#6 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 26 March 2013 - 06:38 AM

1.) I'm wondering if the Canucks might have to take back an extra contract/cap dump in the deal. The Islanders do have a lot of cap space, but it doesn't mean that they want to use it up. :)

I'm also thinking that Ballard could bring back more of a return than just Martin (a 4th line grinder) and a 2nd (although as it sits, it would be the 39th pick overall). Still, I see it as overpayment on the part of the Canucks, even if we factor in the $3 million cap dump by the Canucks in the deal as written.

2.) Higgins may well go on his own. He's probably being underpaid (by at least a few hundred thousand) of what he could have gotten elsewhere. And if your alternative to Higgins is Torres, then I would say keep Higgins.

3.) Any idea what team wants to give up a "young right shooting dman who can step in and a 1st" for Luongo and Booth? And who would this young d-man be? And for what year would this belong?

4.) Clarkson might be a good signing, and the Canucks might have to go as high as the salary you have suggested, but the guy has had some variable results over his career. How flexible is he as to where he can play? The team is getting a bit full on right wing with Burrows, Kassian and Hansen all over there. I'm not that familiar with Clarkson, so other than size, what does he bring to the first line and the Sedins? Can he play the type of cycle game of the Sedins?

I would prefer that the Canucks not re-sign Torres. And I certainly wouldn't re-sign him at that price.

I suspect that Raymond can be had for something less than the $3 million you are suggesting. I suspect that Gillis will be able to grind a home-town discount out of the guy because of all the loyalty he has shown Raymond these past two years. And, I think Raymond likes it here.

5.) Hansen on the 4th line is a waste of talent, especially if you're putting Torres ahead of him.

6.) Bieksa is a right side d-man. Why are you bringing in a right side d-man only to play Bieksa on the left? Garrison is a left side d-man, although he can play on the right side (but supposedly he is better on the left).

So, for your pairings the team could perhaps have Garrison, Edler and Hamhuis on the left side, and Bieksa, Tanev and "new guy" on the right.


regards,
G.



1. Don't underestimate the value of Martin. He set the NHL season record for hits last year. The year prior he had 299, last year he had 374, and in a full season would have been on pace to beat that (at 157 right now). He has speed, can skate, and can fight and adds an element to that fourth line we desperately need. Moreover, it frees up a contract that while I like Ballard, is too high for his role. Martin makes $1 mil per season and adds a punisher to the 4th line.

2. Higgins vs. Torres. Issue here is not that I don't like Higgins, its that we have too many of the same type of player. The 5'11, player who while tough on his skates isn't a hitter, feisty, crap disturber. We need a few more on this team, players that get in peoples faces, push dmen because they are worried they are about to be hit, which foreces turnovers and chances for guys like Mayray to bury them. The question is more mayray vs. higgins and i think mayray's skill level and bounce back year say he's an important part of the depth scoring.

3. Right shooting dman is a wish. Clearly would have to come from the usual suspects in a lou deal but it is a nice to have. Issue is getting a good young dman who can step in now, and play for cheap relative to ballard and the pick.

4. Clarkson is an underrated stud. He is only 28, fights (avg 120 mins in PIMS last years) is 6'1 200 lbs, hits (avg'd 170 hits last two years), scored 30 last year and is on pace for around the same this year in a full season. He can cycle and move up and down the roster bc of his grit (can play 2nd and 3rd line roles as well). Moreover, on the PP he adds another net presence on the second grouping until Kassian is ready. He makes us tough to deal with.

5. Hansen is valuable but on the third line, that line is too small come playoff time. By putting him on the 4th with Martin and Lappy, you get a line that hits, forechecks, tires out dmen like no tomorrow, and can pot the occasional goal. I love Hansen and this lineup allows AV to fully role 4 lines, like he did in the run. That means the 4th starts getting more ice. These deals bring balance to each line. Given Schroder, MayRay and Hansen are just too small come playoff time as a group, and you dont want a line 'disappearing' you need to have size there. Kassian or Clarkson need to be the Sedin's come playoff time to create room and respect (no liberties). Torres on the third adds the size to forecheck hard/hit and intimidate defenders, resulting in more room for Mayray and Schroeds (who have great chemistry). He can also skate so he can keep up with them and has decent hands. It changes the dynamic of that line. Hansen is also not a 1st or 2nd line player. He is a 3rd or 4th.

6. Bieksa is a left shooting dman. Its better positionally to have a player on the strong side of his shot (open to passes in his defensive end vs taking a pass on is backhand). This is why so many are concerned with our lack of right handed dmen. In the best of all worlds you want 4 lefties and 4 righties (2 are clearly depth).
  • 0

#7 CanucksFanMike

CanucksFanMike

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,632 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:36 PM

Clarkson would be nice to have, but unlikely that we land him

I still think Booth can be a 30 goal-scorer.... Last year he was transitioning then got hurt, and this year he has been injured almost all year so I think he deserves a chance to prove he can be the 30 goal-scorer that MG brought him here to be.

Higgins is a great 2nd/3rd liner..... great work ethic, good skill, great compete level so we should do all we can to keep him this summer

I really really really dont want Torres back
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#8 Watermelons

Watermelons

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,599 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 11

Posted 26 March 2013 - 02:07 PM

6. Bieksa is a left shooting dman. Its better positionally to have a player on the strong side of his shot (open to passes in his defensive end vs taking a pass on is backhand). This is why so many are concerned with our lack of right handed dmen. In the best of all worlds you want 4 lefties and 4 righties (2 are clearly depth).


Good proposal but Bieksa is a RIGHT shooting d-man. We have 2 right shooting d-men right now in Bieksa and Tanev...Note that Bieksa played with Hamhuis for the past two seasons while Edler played with Salo....I don't remember seeing a Bieksa-Salo pairing because both are right shot d-men.

Check out these videos:






  • 0

tumblr_lv6jbk180f1r5jtugo1_250.gif  Kirby_eats_a_watermelon.gif 


#9 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:05 AM

Good proposal but Bieksa is a RIGHT shooting d-man. We have 2 right shooting d-men right now in Bieksa and Tanev...Note that Bieksa played with Hamhuis for the past two seasons while Edler played with Salo....I don't remember seeing a Bieksa-Salo pairing because both are right shot d-men.

Check out these videos:

https://www.youtube....h?v=QanU8VEcqoE

https://www.youtube....h?v=kgEV6qoEWM0

https://www.youtube....h?v=FLabC8NOW9s


Ah ok...

Not sure why people get their panties in a bunch but that still means we only have 2 right handed shots on D, so...umm

maybe just change up the pairings? I'm not the coach, so it doesn't really matter

:towel: :frantic:
  • 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.