Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Would you move Schroeder?


  • Please log in to reply
155 replies to this topic

#1 Ugli Fruit

Ugli Fruit

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:28 PM

If so, for what kind of return? Big winger like a Voracek type? Young pmd like Hedman? A veteran backup maybe?

 

All three may be viable, at least under present circumstances. That said, there might be some reasons to keep him as well.

 

Schroeder is on the short side, yes. However he isn't, "small". He is stocky, which means he is at least pretty stable and not very easy to knock down (recall Brad Marchand, for example). This can translate into agility AND balance, two things a lot of bigger players fall short on. Add his good pace/hands and he has potential there.

 

He is also a hybrid of a playmaker and scorer. He can do both equally well, and that makes him very versatile. Regardless of whether or not he can transition to wing, he will synergize with a wider group of people and complement them appropriately.

 

I recall in the first intermission vs Washington, Schroeder was asked about his linemates (I think it was Matthias and Booth or Kassian), and he was talking about how they were creating enough space for him to be able to think more about his game. That goes to show that not all three forwards have to be massive to be dangerous.

 

I personally think he could be an asset - a younger and potentially better Derek Roy, if you will. Shouldn't really be built around him, but is a very, very good complementary forward who will not be that expensive (his lack of size may eat into his value, especially in the west).

 

Thoughts?

 

Edit: please stop b!tching about the examples used. They are examples of big wingers and puck moving d-men, not trade offers for Schroeder. Sad how it just takes one word for at least half of CDC to completely lose track of what they were reading. Sigh


Edited by Ugli Fruit, 16 March 2014 - 07:01 PM.

  • 0

Formerly known as LordofBrussels

There we have it folks, we have literally blamed everyone for everything at this point


Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image


#2 ken kaniff

ken kaniff

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined: 18-June 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:38 PM

*
POPULAR

Schroeder would fetch a 2nd at most. He has little value right now.
  • 5
RIP rick
Sig too big.

#3 Brendan Gaunce

Brendan Gaunce

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,152 posts
  • Joined: 22-June 12

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:38 PM

I can tell you right now he is not worth Hedman or Vorachek lol.


  • 4

Posted Image


#4 kodos

kodos

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,050 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:41 PM

*
POPULAR

Voracek or Hedman? Are you high?
  • 10
Posted Image

#5 Sugar baby watermelon

Sugar baby watermelon

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,376 posts
  • Joined: 15-September 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:41 PM

I like him for that 3rd line centre, he is capable ofmaking that nice seeing eye pass, he needs peopke who can finish, maybe Hansen n Higgins would be key, get to the open spot, have someone work with him on the faceoff, he is pretty good though, and he does have a nice shot. Do all 3rd line centres have to be grinding checking centres??
  • 1

#6 kodos

kodos

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,050 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:41 PM

I do understand that you said "like" and don't mean those exact players, but you wouldn't get close enough that it's even worth mentioning guys like that as a comparison.
  • 0
Posted Image

#7 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,179 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:41 PM

No. Value nil.

Boost value first and evaluate.
  • 1
Posted Image

#8 Deets

Deets

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 12

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:42 PM

So the question is, would I move Schroeder for Hedman or Vorachek?

Yes.
  • 2

#9 King Heffy

King Heffy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,504 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 10

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:43 PM

He's more valuable to us than the potential return.  I'd like him to at least be here at training camp next year to provide some competition for Horvat and Gaunce. 


  • 0

KcJJSvD.jpg

 

Put Gino in the ROH


#10 Lulover88

Lulover88

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,861 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 12

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:45 PM

He's more valuable to us than the potential return.  I'd like him to at least be here at training camp next year to provide some competition for Horvat and Gaunce. 

i agree ... at this point he really hasn't proven himself to be a starting nhler ..   gotta say I'm bummed .. thought he would have more of an impact .. still early though 


  • 0

#11 Florence

Florence

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,638 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:47 PM

Schroeder is older than Hedman and a hell of a lot worst. Voracek is about a year older and a hell of a lot better. Not to mention both Tampa and Philly are playoff teams. 

 

If that is the return you want better hold on to Jordan and hope he surpassed them in numbers then offer the trade. Otherwise none of them would consider it


  • 0

ezgifcom-gif-maker_zps756122ce.gif


#12 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,758 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:48 PM

If so, for what kind of return? Big winger like a Voracek type? Young pmd like Hedman? A veteran backup maybe?

 

All three may be viable, at least under present circumstances. That said, there might be some reasons to keep him as well.

 

Schroeder is on the short side, yes. However he isn't, "small". He is stocky, which means he is at least pretty stable and not very easy to knock down (recall Brad Marchand, for example). This can translate into agility AND balance, two things a lot of bigger players fall short on. Add his good pace/hands and he has potential there.

 

He is also a hybrid of a playmaker and scorer. He can do both equally well, and that makes him very versatile. Regardless of whether or not he can transition to wing, he will synergize with a wider group of people and complement them appropriately.

 

I recall in the first intermission vs Washington, Schroeder was asked about his linemates (I think it was Matthias and Booth or Kassian), and he was talking about how they were creating enough space for him to be able to think more about his game. That goes to show that not all three forwards have to be massive to be dangerous.

 

I personally think he could be an asset - a younger and potentially better Derek Roy, if you will. Shouldn't really be built around him, but is a very, very good complementary forward who will not be that expensive (his lack of size may eat into his value, especially in the west).

 

Thoughts?

 

 

I'm drunk too but this is ludicrous. Voracek? You gotta be kidding. He might garner a 4th rounder.


  • 0

"What players need is the right kind of strength and power. That includes learning to understand that leverage and positioning can be just as important as raw strength when it comes to winning battles in the game. It's more about timing and athleticism --and avoiding injury--than it is about how much you can bench press. I don't know how many times I've seen a guy with the physique of a defensive end line up a guy half his size, only to bounce off when he connects. Sure, there is room in the game for big guys who can throw their weight around. But for the most part, players are smart enough to see them coming--and strong enough to protect the puck when they arrive. There are trainers out there who know how to devlop hockey-specific strength--though a trainer can help only if a player follows the program. All too often, I've seen players sign up with the best trainer, but not show up for their workouts and never to reap the benefits."

 

Bobby Orr - ORR MY STORY Viking 2013


#13 King Heffy

King Heffy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,504 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 10

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:48 PM

i agree ... at this point he really hasn't proven himself to be a starting nhler ..   gotta say I'm bummed .. thought he would have more of an impact .. still early though 

A lot of smaller guys take a while to make an impact.  Briere and St. Louis immediately come to mind.  Not saying he's going to be that good, but he could still pan out to be a solid NHLer.


  • 0

KcJJSvD.jpg

 

Put Gino in the ROH


#14 shazzam

shazzam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,416 posts
  • Joined: 26-July 07

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:49 PM

In a heartbeat..

Where do you see this kid in a couple of years? I don't think he will be good enough for the top 6 and probably not the guy for a bottom 6 role

failed 1st rounder
  • 1

#15 King Heffy

King Heffy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,504 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 10

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:50 PM

In a heartbeat..

Where do you see this kid in a couple of years? I don't think he will be good enough for the top 6 and probably not the guy for a bottom 6 role

failed 1st rounder

What do you get in return for him now?  Schroeder has more potential than whoever we get back for him is likely to have.


  • 0

KcJJSvD.jpg

 

Put Gino in the ROH


#16 Western Red

Western Red

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 13

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:51 PM

OH MY GOD!

We're keeping Schroeder... he'll sign for 1.5 and be on the third w Kass.

JS is developing.. He had a high ankle sprain... if you don't know what that entails you either

A. Don't get off your couch or computer chair

B. Have no patience for proper development ( see EDM )

C. Are leeching your parents wifi.

PS... JS is one hell of a prospect. Patience boy, patience.

Edited by Western Red, 16 March 2014 - 05:54 PM.

  • 2
CDC vet

#17 asian player

asian player

    Yakuza

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,655 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:52 PM

He doesn't really fit anywhere. He's most certainly not a 1c and we have Horvat/Gaunce/Matthias/Fox/Kesler?/Sedin? to fit the 2c and 3c. He could fit on the wing but again, there are more viable options. And he really wouldn't fetch us a lot. Raymond 2.0?
  • 0
Posted Image
Mad props to Justdean10 for sig

#18 Western Red

Western Red

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 13

Posted 16 March 2014 - 05:59 PM

You guys are crazy. He might get moved but for a 4th?!?! BAHA. wow. He's worth a Tinordi or Del Zotto at least. No homer.
  • 0
CDC vet

#19 Brick Tamland

Brick Tamland

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:02 PM

Hey look everyone, it's another CDC poster posting how they WAY over value Canucks fringe players. Hedman is the 2nd overall from 2009. Schroeder couldn't carry his golf bag.
  • 3
I Love Lamp...

#20 King Heffy

King Heffy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,504 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 10

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:06 PM

Hey look everyone, it's another CDC poster posting how they WAY over value Canucks fringe players. Hedman is the 2nd overall from 2009. Schroeder couldn't carry his golf bag.

Such a huge overvaluing that I have to hope it's a joke.  He's worth about a 3rd rounder at the moment.  (Not that I'd trade him for that return)


  • 0

KcJJSvD.jpg

 

Put Gino in the ROH


#21 brownky

brownky

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,788 posts
  • Joined: 13-July 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:10 PM

Schroeder couldn't carry his golf bag.


That might be because Hedman's clubs would be massively oversized and Schroeder is not massively oversized.

The bag would be dragging on the ground the whole time... Of course he couldn't carry it. What a silly thing to say.
  • 1

#22 asian player

asian player

    Yakuza

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,655 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 11

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:14 PM

You guys are crazy. He might get moved but for a 4th?!?! BAHA. wow. He's worth a Tinordi or Del Zotto at least. No homer.


He is not worth a Del Zotto.
  • 0
Posted Image
Mad props to Justdean10 for sig

#23 NucksCup2015

NucksCup2015

    Canucks Prospect

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,196 posts
  • Joined: 19-November 13

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:25 PM

I think the decision next year for the Nucks will be hard. They now have a strong group up the middle if Horvat can make the jump

 

Henrik

Kesler

Santo (assume he'll be resigned and lucky for nucks he will come cheap bc of the injury)

Richardson

Horvat

Schroeder

Mattias

 

I think the best lines if all work out will be

 

Burr / Henrik / Jensen

Daniel / Horvat / Kesler

Matthias / Santo/Schroeder / Kassian

Higgins / Richardson / Hansen

 

Therefore the challenge will be Santo or Schroeder. I don't know if Schroeder in the minors will  help him so they will have a very important decision to make.

 

I don't think Santo is really a 2c so not sure what happens if Horvat isn't ready....best outcome for the nucks is that Horvat is ready but if not, problem becomes 2w - the issue we've always had..


  • 0

#24 lumberman

lumberman

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 488 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 08

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:26 PM

Dude, who would want him?
All the wannabee GM's on this site think our players, specifically support players have value to another team,
BREAKING: our support players suck! geez!
  • 0
Posted Image

#25 Brick Tamland

Brick Tamland

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:33 PM

He is not worth a Del Zotto.


Tinordi? I hear supertramp playing in the background...
  • 0
I Love Lamp...

#26 tas

tas

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,648 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:36 PM

i'd let him walk. he doesn't bring enough to the table to justify a roster spot.
  • 0

#27 Brick Tamland

Brick Tamland

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:37 PM

If so, for what kind of return? Big winger like a Voracek type? Young pmd like Hedman? A veteran backup maybe?
 
All three may be viable, at least under present circumstances. That said, there might be some reasons to keep him as well.
 
Schroeder is on the short side, yes. However he isn't, "small". He is stocky, which means he is at least pretty stable and not very easy to knock down (recall Brad Marchand, for example). This can translate into agility AND balance, two things a lot of bigger players fall short on. Add his good pace/hands and he has potential there.
 
He is also a hybrid of a playmaker and scorer. He can do both equally well, and that makes him very versatile. Regardless of whether or not he can transition to wing, he will synergize with a wider group of people and complement them appropriately.
 
I recall in the first intermission vs Washington, Schroeder was asked about his linemates (I think it was Matthias and Booth or Kassian), and he was talking about how they were creating enough space for him to be able to think more about his game. That goes to show that not all three forwards have to be massive to be dangerous.
 
I personally think he could be an asset - a younger and potentially better Derek Roy, if you will. Shouldn't really be built around him, but is a very, very good complementary forward who will not be that expensive (his lack of size may eat into his value, especially in the west).
 
Thoughts?


Wrong to the 13th degree.
  • 1
I Love Lamp...

#28 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,063 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:38 PM

Cant say im impressed with him yet...but his trade value is zilch so why move him unless in some package deal.
  • 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.

#29 BanTSN

BanTSN

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,365 posts
  • Joined: 08-October 06

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:41 PM

Ugli thread.
  • 1
Posted Image

#30 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 16 March 2014 - 06:47 PM

You guys are crazy. He might get moved but for a 4th?!?! BAHA. wow. He's worth a Tinordi or Del Zotto at least. No homer.

 

 

You must be high as frack off your tree if you think Schroeder is worth Tinordi or Del Zotto straight up.  

 

 

High as a ???? kite.

 

 

 

OP is high as frack for thinking Schroeder is worth anything even close to a Voracek or a Hedman, lol.

 

 

 

How do these ideas even happen?


  • 0

RIP LB RR PD





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.