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

Benning on the 1040 Jan 19th/2017


Coconuts

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Zhukini said:

Jake Virtanen's value has plummeted, there's no point in trading him at 20. Maybe he gets it, maybe he doesn't, but trading him when his value is at best an early second round pick is foolish. 

 

Ben is interesting, I think he'll be a solid 35 pt man in the future, but those are a dime a dozen and I wouldn't be opposed to moving him. People are more infactuated with his personality as they were with Lack and we can see how that turned out. Kind of the opposite of the Jake situation, it might be smart to sell high with him.

But at the same time- the sophomore slump is real. 

Speaking of selling high - Sbisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fateless said:

The only real miss in drafting so far has been Virtanen (compared to what we could have had

Can we just chill on the Virtanen talk it's depressing?  High drafts faulter all of the time.  Strome sent down.  Duclair sent down.  Puliarvi sent down.  Bennett a healthy scratch.  Are these teams freaking out and calling these guys a bust?  Duclair had 44 points last year and this year he has 7.  It happens so let's just take a deep breath and give it time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Winter Soldier said:

The next time someone says 'I'm afraid that JB is going to trade futures for rentals'? Slap them on the wrist.

 

Yeah, him saying their game plan might have changed sure changes everything doesn't it? No reason to think he will trade picks now that he said that! I mean besides things like a 2nd for Vey, 3rd for Dorsett, throwing in a 2nd in the Bonino trade and that amazing mccan 2nd and 4th for not-so-gudbranson and a 5th. I mean why pay attention to recent history when we have this interview where he "thinks the philosophy has changed"

 

the fact you have upvotes really speaks volumes to the rampant stupidity in this fan base and this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Provost said:

It makes sense for sure...

 

Virtanen was a missed pick, Inwas horrified at the time thinking he should have gone like 12-15.  If we wanted that type of player Ritchie was there too.

 

Hutton signed to a cheap bridge deal making him more attractive to teams.  He seems like the odd man out.  Tanev would be worth more but is also a steadying influence on the blue line and it is a lot to ask of Stecher to be a permanent top pairing guy already.

 

Edler-Tanev

Sbisa-Stecher

Tryamkin-Gudbranson

Biega

 

Not too shabby really, especially thinking of Juolevi in the mix in a couple seasons starting to take over from Edler.

 

Hutton's not the odd man out there, it's Sbisa.

 

Hutton's not being dealt. He's a future d-core.

 

We're going to lose Sbisa in the expansion draft, most likely, so he's the odd man out... especially with how well Sbisa is playing, it seems amiss if the Canucks lose anybody but him (though one of Granlund, Baertschi, Sutter, or Gaunce may be of interest to Las Vegas). So the Canucks aren't really in a position to move Hutton now... unless it's to acquire a Landeskog or Duchene type player...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Davathor said:

 

Yeah, him saying their game plan might have changed sure changes everything doesn't it? No reason to think he will trade picks now that he said that! I mean besides things like a 2nd for Vey, 3rd for Dorsett, throwing in a 2nd in the Bonino trade and that amazing mccan 2nd and 4th for not-so-gudbranson and a 5th. I mean why pay attention to recent history when we have this interview where he "thinks the philosophy has changed"

 

the fact you have upvotes really speaks volumes to the rampant stupidity in this fan base and this forum.

Rentals, Davathor.  Vey, Dorsett, Sutter, and Gudbranson are not rentals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After some thought sitting Stecher for some games would be good I think because he's had a lot to absorb. We don't want him slumping next year like Hutty did this year.

Tryamkin should be good as he started later.

Avoiding the dreaded sophmore slump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Provost said:

It makes sense for sure...

 

Virtanen was a missed pick, Inwas horrified at the time thinking he should have gone like 12-15.  If we wanted that type of player Ritchie was there too.

 

Hutton signed to a cheap bridge deal making him more attractive to teams.  He seems like the odd man out.  Tanev would be worth more but is also a steadying influence on the blue line and it is a lot to ask of Stecher to be a permanent top pairing guy already.

 

Edler-Tanev

Sbisa-Stecher

Tryamkin-Gudbranson

Biega

 

Not too shabby really, especially thinking of Juolevi in the mix in a couple seasons starting to take over from Edler.

 

Virtanen may not be an optimum pick?

 

But first its waaay to early to call him a wasted pick! Second, even to call him a bad pick...

 

Jake is a knock down guaranteed NHL player with his size and speed. He was already highly effective as a 3rd and 4th liner. Best or 2knd best Corsi on the team when he was sent down. And added a dynamic we need and needed.  As much as you might like better from a 6th overall? Sometimes you just have to take what you get if they make it. He's only (maybe I should not use only?) down in Utica to develop him (back) into the Top 6 sniper we were also hoping he would be. Which is still possible. I personally argued for Nylander leading up to the draft. I still applauded, and have not changed my mind yet when we selected Jake.

 

You cannot always get the single best player, and claim the GM is a bum, if we don't.  Example > people here laud our selection of Boeser? A great pick! Which he is.  But the very next selection was a guy, Pastrnak, who is already a legit top line sniper, on his way to nearly 40 goals and 65 points.  

 

And just as a related conversation, Ritchie was a much bigger risk where he was taken. He had perceivably more skills, even bigger size. But he was fat and out of shape at draft time. Jake was the fastest skater forwards, and backwards, in his draft class. He has athleticism Ritchie dreams of. Just like Ritchie has slick hands Jake could make use of.  I would still bet on both to have long careers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, luckylager said:

But at the same time- the sophomore slump is real. 

Speaking of selling high - Sbisa.

I don't think you're seeing a "high" - he's been improving consistently over the past two years. I think you're seeing the player that Sbisa has become, not just an opportunity to pump and dump.

Tryamkin, Gudbranson and Sbisa make this team difficult to play against - I won't be surprised if they find a way to retain Sbisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Rentals, Davathor.  Vey, Dorsett, Sutter, and Gudbranson are not rentals.

 Vey wasn't? He might as well have been. Not-so-gudbranson was a terrible trade too. The fact he's still here doesn't change that fact. You want to narrow it down to "rentals only" ok. But if you have a reply you can only use three letter words to make sure my points valid. 

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Virtanen may not be an optimum pick?

 

But first its waaay to early to call him a wasted pick! Second, even to call him a bad pick...

 

Jake is a knock down guaranteed NHL player with his size and speed. He was already highly effective as a 3rd and 4th liner. Best or 2knd best Corsi on the team when he was sent down. And added a dynamic we need and needed.  As much as you might like better from a 6th overall? Sometimes you just have to take what you get if they make it. He's only (maybe I should not use only?) down in Utica to develop him (back) into the Top 6 sniper we were also hoping he would be. Which is still possible. I personally argued for Nylander leading up to the draft. I still applauded, and have not changed my mind yet when we selected Jake.

 

You cannot always get the single best player, and claim the GM is a bum, if we don't.  Example > people here laud our selection of Boeser? A great pick! Which he is.  But the very next selection was a guy, Pastrnak, who is already a legit top line sniper, on his way to nearly 40 goals and 65 points.  

 

And just as a related conversation, Ritchie was a much bigger risk where he was taken. He had perceivably more skills, even bigger size. But he was fat and out of shape at draft time. Jake was the fastest skater forwards, and backwards, in his draft class. He has athleticism Ritchie dreams of. Just like Ritchie has slick hands Jake could make use of.  I would still bet on both to have long careers.

Surfer,

 

Agree with you, but wanted to confirm that Pastrnak was taken in 2014 after McCann, not 2015 after Boeser. 

 

Pastrnak was a steal for Boston. 

 

Boeser looks to be a steal for Vancouver. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bandwagon38 said:

Can we just chill on the Virtanen talk it's depressing?  High drafts faulter all of the time.  Strome sent down.  Duclair sent down.  Puliarvi sent down.  Bennett a healthy scratch.  Are these teams freaking out and calling these guys a bust?  Duclair had 44 points last year and this year he has 7.  It happens so let's just take a deep breath and give it time.

I'm not saying he's a bust or anything, just that compared to the players taken around him, he's definitely underwhelmed. Its not like he played well in his stint with us OR in Utica so far. I realize he's still developing, but you can't honestly tell me you're glad he's who we took at #6 right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Surfer,

 

Agree with you, but wanted to confirm that Pastrnak was taken in 2014 after McCann, not 2015 after Boeser. 

 

Pastrnak was a steal for Boston. 

 

Boeser looks to be a steal for Vancouver. 

Must be cheap meds...  :P

 

Frack my memory pulls up the right concept, in the wrong place, all the time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't think you're seeing a "high" - he's been improving consistently over the past two years. I think you're seeing the player that Sbisa has become, not just an opportunity to pump and dump.

Tryamkin, Gudbranson and Sbisa make this team difficult to play against - I won't be surprised if they find a way to retain Sbisa.

Now's not the time to trade Hutton though. Sbisa has steadily improved, no doubt, which is why he should be moved.

 

Despite his heavier game I don't see us getting a different return for Sbisa than we would Hutton, so I'd rather move Sbisa because Hutty has more potential. This team needs potential, not gradual peak in 3yrs. We won't be there yet, sadly.

 

Also, Sbisa still fails to clear the crease / box out / play the body on a regular basis, and prefers puck watching, stick play in his own zone. Hutton's younger, so.... yaaaah... (Scratches head)

 

The expansion draft really sucks. I'd love to keep both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, luckylager said:

Now's not the time to trade Hutton though. Sbisa has steadily improved, no doubt, which is why he should be moved.

 

Despite his heavier game I don't see us getting a different return for Sbisa than we would Hutton, so I'd rather move Sbisa because Hutty has more potential. This team needs potential, not gradual peak in 3yrs. We won't be there yet, sadly.

 

Also, Sbisa still fails to clear the crease / box out / play the body on a regular basis, and prefers puck watching, stick play in his own zone. Hutton's younger, so.... yaaaah... (Scratches head)

 

The expansion draft really sucks. I'd love to keep both of them.

I'd probably try to move Edler to someone like Tampa.  As much as I like him and it would set the team back a step or two, I think in the longer run that might be the best option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'd probably try to move Edler to someone like Tampa.  As much as I like him and it would set the team back a step or two, I think in the longer run that might be the best option.

100%. 

But that-t NTC!

I've wanted Edler moved since 2014

And given up all hope on that option

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Fateless said:

I'm not saying he's a bust or anything, just that compared to the players taken around him, he's definitely underwhelmed. Its not like he played well in his stint with us OR in Utica so far. I realize he's still developing, but you can't honestly tell me you're glad he's who we took at #6 right now.

I honestly wasn't glad even when we drafted him. I wanted Ehlers or Nylander. But if you were asked, which player is likely to get up to speed in the NHL sooner, the slick highly skilled forward or the bruising power forward, what would your answer be? And which one would you want when you have become a serious contender trying to fight your way past the big bullies in the Pacific Division after the refs have thrown their whistles away?

 

He seems to be a dumb jock who has all the tools to be a useful NHL player, and I expect he will be someday. But it could easily take him a few more years before he figures it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Fateless said:

I'm not saying he's a bust or anything, just that compared to the players taken around him, he's definitely underwhelmed. Its not like he played well in his stint with us OR in Utica so far. I realize he's still developing, but you can't honestly tell me you're glad he's who we took at #6 right now.

Glad is irrelevant.  We took who we took and let's give it time.  Ehlers or Nylander have started out great getting goals but that is their only bag of tricks.  Obviously goals are needed but the Canucks saw much more than goals when they signed Virt and he still might deliver.  Are Ehlers and Nylander playing that much better than Baer and Granny?  Guys we scored for 2nd round picks.  Virtanen in a couple of years in a playoff run is the kind of player that doesn't need to be scoring to make an impact.  Obviously scoring would be great but you are ecstatic with 15-20 goals if he can bring a physical intimidation to a line.  Those other guys have to score or they bring nothing.

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...