Where'd Luongo? Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Yakupov wasn't given a real opportunity in St Louis. He averaged 10:41 in TOI and only got to play half the season. Sure you can argue it's because he didn't try, but there was definitely a sense that the coaches there didn't like him. Yakupov has the skill-set to be a dominant player IF he is given proper guidance and is utilized correctly. There is a correlation with Edmonton's former players whose growth was stunted by being in that poisonous organization during their dark years, and those same players finding their game 2-3 years after leaving the organization. Gagner Hemsky Schultz Paajarvi Perron Each of the above are a unique in their own respect, but that is a fairly large list of players that were given the right opportunity and continued their careers. Give Nail a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHYCHRUN Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Y not. The guy never got a sniff in St.Louis and in Edm he was the whipping boy. Edm shouldve never played him in his rookie yr. This guy would be the most exciting Canuck for this next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violator Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Made a proposal a few years ago were i thought we should grab him Now we pretty much get him for free and dirt cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Losing With Pride Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Would this be the only 1st overall pick we had in our lineup, let alone on our team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said: Cool. It must be interesting to go to these places and get to have a taste of life in other places. Some obviously more than others. ... ALL EXPENSES PAID. Fun stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 18 hours ago, terrible.dee said: Talk to Larionov and find out what the hell happened Simple -- it's become evident he can't hockey. Therefore: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Monty said: However, the entire league and the Canucks know what Yakupov brings. We've seen it every year and it's getting worse. So, in seeing and knowing that the only way he's useful is as a top 6, but he's been declining offensively at an alarming rate, my question would then be, "What's the point?" If the Canucks know what he brings, and it isn't anything noteworthy, then why go that route? Why? Nothing to lose. Doesn't work out then waive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 7 minutes ago, Losing With Pride said: Would this be the only 1st overall pick we had in our lineup, let alone on our team? Exactly. How can the Canucks, or any team go wrong in taking a chance on a 1OA. Even if Yakupov hadn't gone 1OA, he still would have gone on to be picked in the high 1st round of 2012. Murray (CBJ), Galchenyuk (MTL), Griffin Reinhart (NYI) and Reilly (TOR) went 2nd to 5th. Yakupov would most likely have fit somewhere in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 6 minutes ago, Losing With Pride said: Would this be the only 1st overall pick we had in our lineup, let alone on our team? Current team yes. History no (Jovanovski, Sundin, Wickenheiser, Bridgman, Monahan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Monty said: Not sure what there is to "lose", but considering he should be in his prime right now and has been getting worse and worse offensively, it's also arguable that there is nothing to gain, either. I'm in the camp that the Canucks are in deep, deep trouble for an on ice, competitive product over the next 5+ years. So definitely giving younger players, like Yak, has merit. However, the entire league and the Canucks know what Yakupov brings. We've seen it every year and it's getting worse. So, in seeing and knowing that the only way he's useful is as a top 6, but he's been declining offensively at an alarming rate, my question would then be, "What's the point?" If the Canucks know what he brings, and it isn't anything noteworthy, then why go that route? One thing to consider to entertain bring him in on a "show me" contract is the familiarity with past players that are on the team. Because the team will suck anyway, then play him big minutes with Goldy and Boucher to see if they can get that chemistry back. Low risk/ high reward scenario...if nothing changes, we know what the bottom 6 and the Sedins will bring to the team...the only line on an upward swing is the Horvat line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 Could we sign Yak to a tryout contract in the pre-season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 50 minutes ago, Losing With Pride said: Would this be the only 1st overall pick we had in our lineup, let alone on our team? Garry Monahan - First overall ever Mel Bridgeman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancouver Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 I think I'm leaning towards weal over yak but wouldn't mind either really. I'd probably just sign whichever ones cheaper (probably yak) to a 1 year deal. Nothing to lose really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betadog Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 3 years 5 mill i dont want him doing well and cashing in on a 1 year deal, it gives him more per year than he worth on a 1 year deal and if young guys start coming up, in 3 years if he is worth more since we will have more $$$ do to entry level contracts. if he doesn't pan that money wouldn't hurt us if he playing 3rd line or even a buyout. His talent is worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 4 hours ago, Pete M said: Too bad if JB doesn't sign him...1-2 year deal at $1 M, nothing to lose here considering the plugs that are currently on the team. I'm not so sure about that. He has the skill for sure - but not the mind to think the game quick enough. Put him on a line with other players and they end up getting pulled down in both development and confidence. I'd say we have THAT to lose. But as a reclamation project, I'd still be willing to give it a shot. At worst, you stick him on waivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazzymx Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 I rather give Yakupov a chance than seeing Chaput or Megna in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainLinden16 Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 21 minutes ago, nazzymx said: I rather give Yakupov a chance than seeing Chaput or Megna in the lineup. Megna hate is fine but Shampoo is money!!! It's like having Lappy back without the yapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 19 hours ago, lmm said: I would like to see the Canucks manage like that but since AV left, Canuck coachiing has been all about the Homogenious 200' player. I know we have a new coach, only time will tell if he can coach individuals into a team or if he requires 25 identical players. Things didn't look good after Goldy's first goal. Unfortunately, I %100 agree with you, Our new coach spent a season going "Eakins" on Virtanen and aside from weight loss and lip service, we've yet to see any real signs that things could get better, in fact, the way the season ended it doesn't look like they've managed to connect "The 200ft robot" model with whatever talent Virtanen had prior to his being drafted, the fact that his only sighting has been at an inline hockey camp shows me he's desperate to have some fun and be as far away from the "200ft drone factory" as possible. Now Jake isn't known for having the best attitude, so maybe a lot of the blame falls in his court, but when you take Goldy as you mentioned and Subban into account, then my little Nail come-back-in-Vancouver story, starts to look like a bit of a fairy tale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmetts Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Losing With Pride said: Would this be the only 1st overall pick we had in our lineup, let alone on our team? No mats sundin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted June 27, 2017 Share Posted June 27, 2017 For Christ sakes...can't Bening score a frigging empty netter? The story alone would sell a few more tickets and rekindle fan interest....Nail isn't a bad influence personality wise......THERE'S NOTHING TO LOSE!! And if you want to know what could be gained, check Nail's stats in his rookie season, people forget HE'S SCORED IN THE NHL BEFORE! AT A TOP 6 RATE! I mean f'ing DUUUUUUUUUH!!!!!!! I really can't stand Benning, he's so bad..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.