JamesB Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 17 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said: Going to be stoked to see Gudbranson/Edler pair up during games I think Gudbranson will play with Hutton on the second pairing. Assuming that Tryamkin plays on the third pairing, I guess with Sbisa, and with Edler on the first pairing (with Tanev) that gives the Canucks significant size and strength on all three pairings. And with Pedan waiting in the wings, suddenly the Canuck D looks strong and tough. With all due respect to Bartkowski, Weber and Biega, that was a pretty feeble bottom 3 on the depth chart. However, I still don't see where the scoring will come from. I guess the plan is for Hutton to develop into a good offensive defenceman and for Edler to have a rebound season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 8 minutes ago, JamesB said: I think Gudbranson will play with Hutton on the second pairing. Assuming that Tryamkin plays on the third pairing, I guess with Sbisa, and with Edler on the first pairing (with Tanev) that gives the Canucks significant size and strength on all three pairings. And with Pedan waiting in the wings, suddenly the Canuck D looks strong and tough. With all due respect to Bartkowski, Weber and Biega, that was a pretty feeble bottom 3 on the depth chart. However, I still don't see where the scoring will come from. I guess the plan is for Hutton to develop into a good offensive defenceman and for Edler to have a rebound season. I think everyone expects Hutton/Gudbranson to be a regular pairing and that's fair to say. If it doesn't work out and/or Lidster/WD want to experiment, seeing those two on the ice together might be a treat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 8 minutes ago, JamesB said: I think Gudbranson will play with Hutton on the second pairing. Assuming that Tryamkin plays on the third pairing, I guess with Sbisa, and with Edler on the first pairing (with Tanev) that gives the Canucks significant size and strength on all three pairings. And with Pedan waiting in the wings, suddenly the Canuck D looks strong and tough. With all due respect to Bartkowski, Weber and Biega, that was a pretty feeble bottom 3 on the depth chart. However, I still don't see where the scoring will come from. I guess the plan is for Hutton to develop into a good offensive defenceman and for Edler to have a rebound season. Or maybe we re-sign Hamhuis and move Sbisa: Edler, Tanev Hutton/Hamhuis, Gudbranson Hamhuis/Hutton, Tryamkin Pedan, Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 IMO, Tryamkin is already ahead on the skill department and should be given a chance at top four minutes. This trade does not help the Canucks offensively at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, TheGuardian_ said: IMO, Tryamkin is already ahead on the skill department and should be given a chance at top four minutes. This trade does not help the Canucks offensively at all. You're opinion = Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaBamba Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 We lost one nut when Mitchell left, then the other when Bieksa left. What are we are getting in Gudbranson? Our Balz back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 5 minutes ago, J.R. said: Or maybe we re-sign Hamhuis and move Sbisa: Edler, Tanev Hutton/Hamhuis, Gudbranson Hamhuis/Hutton, Tryamkin Pedan, Larsen I would strongly favor that move (re-signing Hammer and moving Sbisa, maybe for a 2nd round pick). I will cheer if that happens, but I just don't see Benning doing it. He never seems to have been very positive about Hammer and he always seems to over-rate Sbisa. Obviously Benning likes the toughness that Sbisa brings to the table but I would be a lot happier with Hammer as LD on the third pairing (with Tryamkin at RD). And, as you point out, Hutton's development might be smoother if he drops to the 3rd pairing and Hammer plays on the second pairing. I hope it happens but am not holding my breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cramarossa Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Do y'all really think Guddy will be quick to drop the gloves and stick up for his Canucks teammates? The same was said about Prusty, and we see how well that worked out. With that said, I am actually very pleased with the trade. We need more big bodies on the back end, and our center depth didn't leave much room for Canner- who I still maintain has a high ceiling. I believe GMJB when he said it hurt to let him go. Your have to give to get, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 32 minutes ago, tybarber said: The question now is, will Big Bert's number be rejuvenated here next year?? Its time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted May 26, 2016 Author Share Posted May 26, 2016 Tryamkin was wearing 44 this last season, wasn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 2 minutes ago, J.R. said: You're opinion = How many games of Gudbranson's have you seen? How many of Tryamkin's? Can you tell good hockey from bad? If you answer any of these questions then you have an opinion as well. Mine is just based on the small sample size that I have seen or looked up in the myriad of stat web pages. Tryamkin, so far .15 points per game, Gudbranson, .14 point per game And very true, my opinion makes no matter to the Canucks management, the only thing that does is my wallet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, TheGuardian_ said: How many games of Gudbranson's have you seen? How many of Tryamkin's? Can you tell good hockey from bad? If you answer any of these questions then you have an opinion as well. Mine is just based on the small sample size that I have seen or looked up in the myriad of stat web pages. Tryamkin, so far .15 points per game, Gudbranson, .14 point per game And very true, my opinion makes no matter to the Canucks management, the only thing that does is my wallet. There's more to playing hockey than PPG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybarber Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 2 minutes ago, xereau said: Tryamkin was wearing 44 this last season, wasn't he? 88... because he's twice the size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 17 minutes ago, J.R. said: Or maybe we re-sign Hamhuis and move Sbisa: Edler, Tanev Hutton/Hamhuis, Gudbranson Hamhuis/Hutton, Tryamkin Pedan, Larsen I'd be quite happy with that, if we could manage to trade Sbisa without retaining any salary. Not that I don't like Sbisa. I just don't see him becoming a regular top-4 defenseman. And if he tops out as a #5, I'd rather use his salary somewhere else. Re-signing Hamhuis would give us a superior player for right now and a guy who provides more stability, leadership, mentoring, and even offense (compared to Sbisa). Maybe we lose some of Sbisa's (occasional) physicality, but we're not exactly going to be soft with Gudbranson, Tryamkin, and Edler (plus Pedan waiting in the wings). Hamhuis should be good enough for long enough to see the defense through a rebuild. And I think he's got at least 2-3 years worth of being a better defender than Sbisa. So I'd be happy to apply Sbisa's salary to an extension for Hamhuis and hopefully add a pick in the process (by trading Sbisa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: I'd be quite happy with that, if we could manage to trade Sbisa without retaining any salary. Not that I don't like Sbisa. I just don't see him becoming a regular top-4 defenseman. And if he tops out as a #5, I'd rather use his salary somewhere else. Re-signing Hamhuis would give us a superior player for right now and a guy who provides more stability, leadership, mentoring, and even offense (compared to Sbisa). Maybe we lose some of Sbisa's (occasional) physicality, but we're not exactly going to be soft with Gudbranson, Tryamkin, and Edler (plus Pedan waiting in the wings). Hamhuis should be good enough for long enough to see the defense through a rebuild. And I think he's got at least 2-3 years worth of being a better defender than Sbisa. So I'd be happy to apply Sbisa's salary to an extension for Hamhuis and hopefully add a pick in the process (by trading Sbisa). Yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted May 26, 2016 Author Share Posted May 26, 2016 Is Sbisa moveable at full contract value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Just now, xereau said: Is Sbisa moveable at full contract value? Young 4/5 guy with speed and physicality...don't see why not. Probably get something like a 3rd for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaBamba Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Godbranson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommiSantala25 Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 54 minutes ago, tybarber said: The question now is, will Big Bert's number be rejuvenated here next year?? Bartkowski already did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted May 26, 2016 Author Share Posted May 26, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.