Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Canucks interested in D Matt Benning


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, D-Money said:

...But you CAN lose by maxing out on contracts. 

 

Don't know enough of this player to state unequivocally that he's not worth it. But on the surface, it seems a little fishy. The Bruins aren't exactly bursting with young D-men, and for whatever reason they let him walk.

 

You can always buy out C and D list prospects without affecting things at all. Canucks have done this in the past... look at: Peter Andersson and Henrik Tommernes are two recent examples of players who got bought out by the Canucks while playing in Utica (in a mutual termination situation).

 

SO yeah, you can lose out by maxing out contracts but there are ways around to open up spots without too much worry. (The likely buyout candidates this season would be, in my mind, Anton Cederholm and Evan McEney).

 

Also, the Canucks are only at 47 contracts. If they sign Matthew Benning and pass on Jiri Hudler -- they'll still have two contract spots open to sign college guys/acquire players in trades down the line too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Wears an 'A' for Northeastern. Fits the character and leadership mould Benning is looking for.

Tough heavy hitter with some offence, team leader, character player, late round pick and plays the Right side. 

 

 

Bieksa version 2.0... One can only hope. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quantum said:

You can always buy out C and D list prospects without affecting things at all. Canucks have done this in the past... look at: Peter Andersson and Henrik Tommernes are two recent examples of players who got bought out by the Canucks while playing in Utica (in a mutual termination situation).

 

SO yeah, you can lose out by maxing out contracts but there are ways around to open up spots without too much worry. (The likely buyout candidates this season would be, in my mind, Anton Cederholm and Evan McEney).

 

Also, the Canucks are only at 47 contracts. If they sign Matthew Benning and pass on Jiri Hudler -- they'll still have two contract spots open to sign college guys/acquire players in trades down the line too.

If Canucks actually pass on a discounted Hudler, even partially to have a contract for Matt Benning, then I just may have to join the anti-JB crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Quantum said:

You can always buy out C and D list prospects without affecting things at all. Canucks have done this in the past... look at: Peter Andersson and Henrik Tommernes are two recent examples of players who got bought out by the Canucks while playing in Utica (in a mutual termination situation).

 

SO yeah, you can lose out by maxing out contracts but there are ways around to open up spots without too much worry. (The likely buyout candidates this season would be, in my mind, Anton Cederholm and Evan McEney).

 

Also, the Canucks are only at 47 contracts. If they sign Matthew Benning and pass on Jiri Hudler -- they'll still have two contract spots open to sign college guys/acquire players in trades down the line too.

Canucks have Juolevi and Brisebois on sliding-scale contracts.  Means they can sign up to at least another five players (more if the player signed is on sliding-scale...e.g., any drafted player born in 1997 and after, excluding NCAA players).    

 

I'm guessing that Carl Neill and Rodrigo Abols gets signed to ELCs this fall/during or after training camp which will take players under contract number to 49 (47 with sliding scale -- neither of these guys qualify for sliding scale since they will be over-agers if they get sent back down to juniors), leaving the Canucks plenty of room to acquire one more roster player (hopefully a goal scoring forward) and plenty of room for college UFAs next spring.

 

This notion of "wasting" a spot on the 50-man roster is nothing to worry about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, D-Money said:

If Canucks actually pass on a discounted Hudler, even partially to have a contract for Matt Benning, then I just may have to join the anti-JB crowd.

Sign the youth. Hudler does not help the Canuck timeline. There are enough vets on this team now to mentor the transition. Are you suggesting that Hudler makes the Canucks a CUP contender? If not then he simply takes TOI away from young players who are developing to become a serious CUP contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Sign the youth. Hudler does not help the Canuck timeline. There are enough vets on this team now to mentor the transition. Are you suggesting that Hudler makes the Canucks a CUP contender? If not then he simply takes TOI away from young players who are developing to become a serious CUP contender.

Hudler would help push offense, which could definitely help young guys like Horvat, Baertschi, Etem, and Rodin gain confidence. And if the season doesn't go well, we can likely flip him for a 2nd round pick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Hudler would help push offense, which could definitely help young guys like Horvat, Baertschi, Etem, and Rodin gain confidence. And if the season doesn't go well, we can likely flip him for a 2nd round pick.

 

How does it help them - it just keeps them in the bottom-6.  Benning wants to go:

Sedin Sedin Eriksson

Proven goal scorer Sutter Hansen - that's an offensive line with Hudler.

It puts Horvat on a defensive line as WD sees Granlund as an offensive player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll trust GMJB's judgement where the allocation of roster spots is concerned.

That Matt is Benning's nephew - I could not care less about the claims of 'nepotism'.  I'd give JB the benefit of the doubt here - I think he's earned it and doubt he'd risk signing someone that can't cut it simply because he's a relation - there's the risk of looking bad as a result. I'd be more concerned if he wasn't looking at the player.

I think Matt is probably good enough to be firmly in the grey area - worth an ELC - and likely to get one somewhere.

I'll reserve the use of that term for cases where people don't deserve or earn their jobs.

As for Benning vs Hudler - I don't see that as an issue - they're not mutually exclusive - signing Benning wouldn't preclude Hudler - and I'm really not all that keen on signing Hudler in any event (I'll be surprised if he signs for one year, and I wouldn't be too keen on giving him more).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

How does it help them - it just keeps them in the bottom-6.  Benning wants to go:

Sedin Sedin Eriksson

Proven goal scorer Sutter Hansen - that's an offensive line with Hudler.

It puts Horvat on a defensive line as WD sees Granlund as an offensive player.

I helps them the same way it helps every young player that has to push their way up the lineup.

 

Horvat and Baertschi both still need to work on their defensive game before they're gifted top 6 spots. They'll have less pressure on them on the third line while they continue developing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

...As for Benning vs Hudler - I don't see that as an issue - they're not mutually exclusive - signing Benning wouldn't preclude Hudler - and I'm really not all that keen on signing Hudler in any event (I'll be surprised if he signs for one year, and I wouldn't be too keen on giving him more).

I'll be surprised if he signs for anything but one year. In fact, with the lack of demand and money right now, it would be foolish for him to not ensure he's a free agent again in one year's time.

 

There are 23 more jobs and $70 million more dollars to go around next year. Lots of teams will be looking for a middle-6 player to replace the guy they lost in the expansion draft. I imagine Hudler is just looking for the best situation for this season (i.e. obvious top-6 spot and PP time for him) where he can produce offensively and get a much bigger deal next year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

I helps them the same way it helps every young player that has to push their way up the lineup.

 

Horvat and Baertschi both still need to work on their defensive game before they're gifted top 6 spots. They'll have less pressure on them on the third line while they continue developing. 

Horvat is unlikely to play with Baer in a defensive role.  WD said he had Baer with Horvat on the checking line because he wasn't doing anything offensively but not hurting the team defensively.  They started scoring so he kept them together but in March he had Baer in an offensive role while Horvat continued on the checking line because Baertschi was taking Horvat away from his game.

 

WD sees Granlund as an offensive player - so it's way more likely to have Baertschi at LW4 with Granlund at C4 but Granlund has yet to find his scoring touch.   In March Baer kept on creating scoring opportunities (re WD and other teams feed) but nothing on the scoresheet.  He ended up a bit in limbo as he's a playmaker with no goal scorer on his line.  

 

Not sure it helps Horvat either to be the most experienced player on his line - although I guess he would end up playing with Dorsett and possibly Etem or Gaunce on the other wing.

 

With a top-6 of vet and bottom-6 of 'kids'+Dorsett - why wouldn't opponents just send their best lines against the 'kids' lines for an easy goal.

 

btw Ehlers was on the 2nd line for most of the season playing on average over 16min - they sheltered him by playing him with consistent linemates who could help him progress.  Laviolette used the same approach with Forsberg.  Even Nylander played on the 2nd line when called up.  Virtanen on the other hand is 11:30 on every line with pretty much everyone and even some struggling linemates.  If not for the Sutter injury - maybe they would have kept the Burrows-Sutter-Virtanen line intact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mll said:

Horvat is unlikely to play with Baer in a defensive role.  WD said he had Baer with Horvat on the checking line because he wasn't doing anything offensively but not hurting the team defensively.  They started scoring so he kept them together but in March he had Baer in an offensive role while Horvat continued on the checking line because Baertschi was taking Horvat away from his game.

 

WD sees Granlund as an offensive player - so it's way more likely to have Baertschi at LW4 with Granlund at C4 but Granlund has yet to find his scoring touch.   In March Baer kept on creating scoring opportunities (re WD and other teams feed) but nothing on the scoresheet.  He ended up a bit in limbo as he's a playmaker with no goal scorer on his line.  

 

Not sure it helps Horvat either to be the most experienced player on his line - although I guess he would end up playing with Dorsett and possibly Etem or Gaunce on the other wing.

 

With a top-6 of vet and bottom-6 of 'kids'+Dorsett - why wouldn't opponents just send their best lines against the 'kids' lines for an easy goal.

 

btw Ehlers was on the 2nd line for most of the season playing on average over 16min - they sheltered him by playing him with consistent linemates who could help him progress.  Laviolette used the same approach with Forsberg.  Even Nylander played on the 2nd line when called up.  Virtanen on the other hand is 11:30 on every line with pretty much everyone and even some struggling linemates.  If not for the Sutter injury - maybe they would have kept the Burrows-Sutter-Virtanen line intact.

Willie also said that he sees Sbisa playing with Gudbranson. 

 

He'll play the team the way Benning wants him to. He doesn't have enough slack left on his leash to not.

 

Baertschi and Horvat will be together I guarantee. Their chemistry was too good to break up. How many times did those two come through when we needed a goal last season? It's all about putting a good two way player with them like Hansen or Burrows. That will balance the line out.

 

Ehlers and Forsberg are top 6 or bust players, not really the same group as Horvat or Virtanen. I have a hard time seeing Virtanen on the opening night roster.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Willie also said that he sees Sbisa playing with Gudbranson. 

 

He'll play the team the way Benning wants him to. He doesn't have enough slack left on his leash to not.

 

Baertschi and Horvat will be together I guarantee. Their chemistry was too good to break up. How many times did those two come through when we needed a goal last season? It's all about putting a good two way player with them like Hansen or Burrows. That will balance the line out.

 

Ehlers and Forsberg are top 6 or bust players, not really the same group as Horvat or Virtanen. I have a hard time seeing Virtanen on the opening night roster.

 

 

 

 

I just answered in the Hudler thread so I'll stop here in this thread.

 

One last comment though Forsberg is not a top-6 or bust.  They see him as a two-way player and Laviolette has also started using him on the PK this year (1:45 on average per game). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, D-Money said:

I'll be surprised if he signs for anything but one year. In fact, with the lack of demand and money right now, it would be foolish for him to not ensure he's a free agent again in one year's time.

 

There are 23 more jobs and $70 million more dollars to go around next year. Lots of teams will be looking for a middle-6 player to replace the guy they lost in the expansion draft. I imagine Hudler is just looking for the best situation for this season (i.e. obvious top-6 spot and PP time for him) where he can produce offensively and get a much bigger deal next year.

 

It's an interesting point that may encourage him to settle for one year - otherwise, no real interest there imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mll said:

I just answered in the Hudler thread so I'll stop here in this thread.

 

One last comment though Forsberg is not a top-6 or bust.  They see him as a two-way player and Laviolette has also started using him on the PK this year (1:45 on average per game). 

Forsberg is not suited for the third or fourth line, his talent would be wasted there.

 

Being on the pk doesn't mean he's not a top 6 player. Sutter and Hansen play on the pk and will be top 6 players for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Forsberg is not suited for the third or fourth line, his talent would be wasted there.

 

Being on the pk doesn't mean he's not a top 6 player. Sutter and Hansen play on the pk and will be top 6 players for us.

Forsberg is ideally in the top-6 but he can also be efficient on the 3rd line.

Sutter and Hansen is the other way around - they are ideally on the 3rd but will be in the top-6.

Ehlers will likely not be efficient in the bottom-6.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...