[Rumour/Speculation] Hudler/Canucks

[apollo]

2 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

A lot of good points here. After more thinking, it makes me wonder why JB would sign Hudler instead of letting a prospect player (Gaunce) take a spot.

 

Why do we need Hudler? If they really need a #2LW (because they don't want to put Baertschi there), then why not let Granlund have a go? We traded Shinkaruk for him, and Shink may be a top 6 player one day. So why not Granlund?

 

Daniel - Henrik - Eriksson

Granlund - Sutter - Rodin/Virtanen

Baertschi - Horvat - Hansen

Etem - Gaunce - Burrows/Dorsett

 

I think Granlund could take a step this year if given the chance. He has the skills and speed. If he continues to play on the 4th line, he'll just continue getting 4th line points.

What if we have injuries? We will. Many at some points of the year. Hudler is meant for this roster. He's icing on the cake.

 

Dont forget he was amazing in Detroit's cup run too. He's exactly what we need to lead us to the playoffs, and hopefully a lengthy cup run. 

[b3.]

I feel like we have seen a variation of this tweet every week.

[Ossi Vaananen]

15 minutes ago, b3. said:

I feel like we have seen a variation of this tweet every week.

Well it's managed 7 pages of discussion in an otherwise dead off season. 

 

I SAID GOOD DAY SIR.

[ButterBean]

3 hours ago, mll said:

They don't want Baertschi there because they don't want to put pressure on him to produce - LW2 is his spot once he's ready.  Like C2 is Horvat's spot once he's ready.

 

They aren't goint to shift that pressure to Granlund or Virtanen who are further back in their development.  There is also no way that Granlund is better than Baer at producing offence.

 

Btw, WD doesn't want Baertschi with Horvat because it's taking Horvat away from his game.  So they'll either have to put Baer on the 4th and they won't put him with the likes of Gaunce or Dorsett, compromise on Horvat's development or put Baer on the 2nd.

 

Why would it take Horvat away from his game? Horvat and Baertschi have good chemistry together and they were putting up decent numbers despite playing with low ice time. Sutter isn't the answer at 2nd line C even tho he was playing well offensively last year he's better in the 3rd line C role.

[insomniac604]

I have heard a lot about this.

 

First of all let's look at the monetary side. We have about 3.4 mill in cap space with 23 forwards signed.

Those forwards include Etem, Gaunce, Virtanen and Granlund. 

I think we can agree that Etem and Granlund will be part of the roster. With Virtanen and (maybe) Gaunce as candidates to be sent down.

 

But right now they are not sent down. If we sign another F one would need to clear waivers. Somebody correct me on this ; who can be sent down without waivers? I think only Virtanen? Maybe Gaunce? Pretty sure Rodin, Granlund and Etem received one-ways. Does Burr have a NMC or can he be sent down?

 

Of course we can also bounce a D but that isn't practical. Biega got a one-way and Tryamkin has a "NHL or KHL" deal, with Pedan as the helper.

 

I think it's pretty obvious that Burrows will be gone next year. We all love him, and few may love him as much as I do, but we won't re-sign him. He will get a much better deal elsewhere. If we can put him in a deal for something resembling a top 6 under 30.. we will do it.

 

I don't want EK. But who else is out there?

Pirri is still available.

 

 

[Bruce Boudreau]

13 hours ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

 

Thoughts?

Rather have Pirri than another retread declining Czech like Vrbata is.

 

98 percent chance he does not sign here. Doesn't make sense he was a Lady Byng finalist at one time.

 

No toughness. Old. 

 

Sedin-Sedin-Ericsson

Hudler-Sutter-Hansen

 

Wtih the exception of Hansen and maybe Sutter, that is easily one of the softest top six group of players in Canucks history. 

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Chip Kelly said:

Rather have Pirri than another retread declining Czech like Vrbata is.

 

98 percent chance he does not sign here. Doesn't make sense he was a Lady Byng finalist at one time.

 

No toughness. Old. 

 

Sedin-Sedin-Ericsson

Hudler-Sutter-Hansen

 

Wtih the exception of Hansen and maybe Sutter, that is easily one of the softest top six group of players in Canucks history. 

Sedin Sedin Burrows

Raymond Kesler Samuelsson

 

That's pretty close. 

 

When the Sedins make up a third of your top 6, it's always going to be fairly "soft". Like I've been saying for awhile though, this team is closer to being a team like Detroit or Tampa than it is to a team like LA or Boston. We need to surround our skilled guys with other skilled guys that can put the puck in the net.

 

The size and grit will come through drafting and timely acquisitions, you can't force a complete identity change overnight. Until then we might as well play to this teams strength, which is skill. If everyone's so convinced we wont make the playoffs, what does it matter anyways?

[Bruce Boudreau]

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Sedin Sedin Burrows

Raymond Kesler Samuelsson

 

That's pretty close. 

 

When the Sedins make up a third of your top 6, it's always going to be fairly "soft". Like I've been saying for awhile though, this team is closer to being a team like Detroit or Tampa than it is to a team like LA or Boston. We need to surround our skilled guys with other skilled guys that can put the puck in the net.

 

The size and grit will come through drafting and timely acquisitions, you can't force a complete identity change overnight. Until then we might as well play to this teams strength, which is skill. If everyone's so convinced we wont make the playoffs, what does it matter anyways?

I get your point for sure. The best years 2010-2012 and before that the WCE years the team was a skill team and an offensive juggernaut with some grit mixed in but not featuring as anything close to being known as a tough or heavy team.

 

When Torts tried to make this team stand up to L.A. if was so unnatural for them to play aggressive and constantly hit and get involved in fights that they totally tired out a few games after playing L.A. and went into a tailspin after the whole Torts vs Hartley incident obviously.

 

To nitpick though Samuelsson could play with some piss and vinegar for a skilled swede, he could play with edge at times, and Burrows and Kesler have always had that in their games even though they were forced to tone down their antics.

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Chip Kelly said:

I get your point for sure. The best years 2010-2012 and before that the WCE years the team was a skill team and an offensive juggernaut with some grit mixed in but not featuring as anything close to being known as a tough or heavy team.

 

When Torts tried to make this team stand up to L.A. if was so unnatural for them to play aggressive and constantly hit and get involved in fights that they totally tired out a few games after playing L.A. and went into a tailspin after the whole Torts vs Hartley incident obviously.

 

To nitpick though Samuelsson could play with some piss and vinegar for a skilled swede, he could play with edge at times, and Burrows and Kesler have always had that in their games even though they were forced to tone down their antics.

Yea, you can't force a square peg into a round hole. This team won't be able to just pretend to play a certain way, you need the right personnel. Until we draft and sign those players this team won't be a heavyweight team.

 

As for Samuelsson, I agree I thought he played with grit, but so does Hansen. Also Burrows grit came from his forechecking and going hard to the net, which Eriksson is capable of doing. As for Kesler vs Sutter, they're both big guys that can skate but Kesler obviously played with much more of an edge.

 

Bottom line is, that lineup wasn't intimidating anyone physically, but no one complained when they put up big points. This team needs another 40-50 point player if it wants to make the playoffs IMO. If that player happens to be Hudler, so be it. I just wanna watch skilled hockey again.

[Realtor Rod]

56 minutes ago, Chip Kelly said:

Rather have Pirri than another retread declining Czech like Vrbata is.

 

98 percent chance he does not sign here. Doesn't make sense he was a Lady Byng finalist at one time.

 

No toughness. Old. 

 

Sedin-Sedin-Ericsson

Hudler-Sutter-Hansen

 

Wtih the exception of Hansen and maybe Sutter, that is easily one of the softest top six group of players in Canucks history. 

Soft is the new hard...

[Canuck Surfer]

9 hours ago, mll said:

Gaunce Granlund Etem.  If I am the opponent - I send out my scoring lines.

All three were inconsistent and at times even shift by shift.  If one struggles - it probably drags the whole line down because there's no stable reference point.  I don't think an all 'youngster' line helps development.

Gaunce and Granlund both were superb two way & defensive players at lower levels. 

 

They would be on the fourth line. If they come out bringing it on any given night?  They keep getting shifts. If they don't just shorten the bench...

 

Both have good motors by the way.  I'm not sure I share your observation regardless.

[Bruce Boudreau]

What's the dirt on Pirri though anybody know?

 

25 year old 20 goal scorers no matter how streaky are not left this long without contracts.

 

Something has to be going on with him mentally or with his private life. Maybe has a bad attitude, lazy work ethic etc?

 

Gotta be more than just waiting for teams to clear cap space and not wanting to sign what would be a bargain short term deal.

 

I say the Canucks should sign him for 1 year and experiment. Low risk, Decent reward if he plays well.

 

Kris Russel too. Either before training camp teams are going to make a move or two to create cap space or these 2 guys and the other unsigned guys with NHL experience will be playing in the KHL or somewhere else in Europe this year.

 

 

[smokes]

Hudler would be pretty versitile and a great addition for any team that is going for it. He would not look out of place if someone from the top line went down, he can provide secondary scoring or the grit needed for a third line. My only problem is that if they add Hudler and take a spot away from a younger guy then I would be really confused on where the direction of the club is going. rebuilding, retooling, stay in the middle or going for the prize?

[bobbyg43]

Noooooo thanks 

common Jim really!

[alfstonker]

I don't want Hudler taking a young player's spot or even taking Burr's spot. I also don't think we should be handing out 2,3,4 year contracts to players like Hudler as it would probably end up just being another Vbrata situation if it doesn't work out.

 

If Calgary didn't want him then why would we pay more or give him longer term than Calgary? Honestly if we were going to go down the Pirri/Hudler route I would rather have signed Raymond for 2 years - that guy's speed was a killer and he was a Canuck through and through.

 

This team needs to keep finding  youth, speed and size now in the forwards. We have these types of players coming through now.

[alfstonker]

5 hours ago, ButterBean said:

Why would it take Horvat away from his game? Horvat and Baertschi have good chemistry together and they were putting up decent numbers despite playing with low ice time. Sutter isn't the answer at 2nd line C even tho he was playing well offensively last year he's better in the 3rd line C role.

Horvat has had good chemistry with everyone, especially Dorsett and Kenins. I see Rodin on the 2nd line if he plays well in the pre season. He can play left or right and shoots left, so maybe Baertschi/Rodin- Sutter- Hansen/Rodin for the second line. That might put Horvat between Etem and Hansen on the 3rd. Etem- Horvat- Hansen

[Alflives]

48 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Horvat has had good chemistry with everyone, especially Dorsett and Kenins. I see Rodin on the 2nd line if he plays well in the pre season. He can play left or right and shoots left, so maybe Baertschi/Rodin- Sutter- Hansen/Rodin for the second line. That might put Horvat between Etem and Hansen on the 3rd. Etem- Horvat- Hansen

Your line combinations are why I don't think we should sign Hudler.  We should go with the guys we have.  Plus, Gaunce deserves a fair shot too.  Isn't Hudler kind of small and soft?  

[DeltaSwede]

Im all for signing Hudler to a 1 year deal. Push back the youngsters and let them brew in the AHL until the trade deadline when the Canucks will probably be out of the playoff race (namely Virtanen) and then trade Hudler to contender. Win-win. 

[Alflives]

10 minutes ago, DeltaSwede said:

Im all for signing Hudler to a 1 year deal. Push back the youngsters and let them brew in the AHL until the trade deadline when the Canucks will probably be out of the playoff race (namely Virtanen) and then trade Hudler to contender. Win-win. 

That sounds like a Leaf's "tank" plan, doesn't it?  

[Ted Lasso]

I'm hoping that Hudler is holding out for multi-year & JB is firm on a 1 year deal. 1 year 2.5M take it or leave it. He's not part if our future, but could be a win/win: Hudler provides offence & Canucks offer very little competition for top 6 minutes, so he can earn his next contract.