• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.
-Vintage Canuck-

[Waivers] 23 players - Sept. 26, 2017 (1 claimed)

Recommended Posts

Poor Shinkaruk.... Wonder if he will ever make the show.

 

Zach Trotman is a really interesting name. IIRC he was getting top-4 time in Boston not too long ago with them getting a bunch of injuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly I think Shink is worth another look. Calgary has not used him in a top 9 role so of course his numbers are down. If we traded Rodin e.g., for a C/F prospect with Shink's potential and background of scoring in the WHL and AHL that we weren't as familiar with I think most of CDC would be fine with it. He's only 22.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

honestly I think Shink is worth another look. Calgary has not used him in a top 9 role so of course his numbers are down. If we traded Rodin e.g., for a C/F prospect with Shink's potential and background of scoring in the WHL and AHL that we weren't as familiar with I think most of CDC would be fine with it. He's only 22.

I think it didnt take long for Utica/Canucks management to realize that Shink's game would not translate well in the NHL.  Lots of his AHL goals and perimeter play wouldnt have worked in the big league.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

I think it didnt take long for Utica/Canucks management to realize that Shink's game would not translate well in the NHL.  Lots of his AHL goals and perimeter play wouldnt have worked in the big league.  

true but looking at the development of Baer e.g., he did overcome similar issues to what Shink will have to as well. Not saying its a slam dunk but I wouldn't be upset by Benning giving it one more try this year.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, zzbottom said:

Zatkoff might be an interesting add. 

For who???

 

The Canucks shouldn't claim any of these players. Are we really going to claim Shinkaruk to take a spot from guys like Boeser or Virtanen?

Edited by ThaManbeast
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shinkaruk was a Gillis draft pick. No way Benning signs him. Besides, he's done nothing to prove he's an NHLer. One of Benning's better trades (Granlund).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Jared Tinordi's career went off the rails thanks to Pedan KO'ing him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ThaManbeast said:

For who???

 

The Canucks shouldn't claim any of these players. Are we really going to claim Shinkaruk to take a spot from guys like Boeser or Virtanen?

no but maybe over a PTO. The book on Baer was the same when we got him, and he was able to elevate his game. I don't really care that much either way just saying it could be an interesting move in a rebuild year. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ZOMG!  We can get Frankie Corrado back and end the debate of asset management!  He could be our 10th defenseman :)  Or Shinkaruk and definitely win the Granlund/Shink trade!  Oh well, going back to morning coffee and glad we moved forward....hehe Granlund for Shinkaruk, still smiling...

Edited by Solinar
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

honestly I think Shink is worth another look. Calgary has not used him in a top 9 role so of course his numbers are down. If we traded Rodin e.g., for a C/F prospect with Shink's potential and background of scoring in the WHL and AHL that we weren't as familiar with I think most of CDC would be fine with it. He's only 22.

 

23 minutes ago, ThaManbeast said:

For who???

 

The Canucks shouldn't claim any of these players. Are we really going to claim Shinkaruk to take a spot from guys like Boeser or Virtanen?

 

17 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Shinkaruk was a Gillis draft pick. No way Benning signs him. Besides, he's done nothing to prove he's an NHLer. One of Benning's better trades (Granlund).

It would look impressive for the Canucks to end up with Granlund and Shinkaruk -- reminding everyone that Benning won the Granny -- Shink trade. But, as @ThaManbeast says, there is just no room for him on the roster. With guys like Boeser, Virtanen, Rodin, and Burmistrov all contending for the last few spots I just don't see how Shink fits.

 

Shink is (another) classic example of a high skill guy who can score in Junior and in the AHL but whose game does not translate to the NHL. And if he can't play top 6, hard to see how he fits.

Edited by JamesB
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JamesB said:

 

 

Shink is (another) classic example of a high skill guy who can score in Junior and in the AHL but whose game does not translate to the NHL. And if he can't play top 6, hard to see how hit fits.

I agree.  Also wouldn't be surprised to see him play in Europe in the next year or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

 

It would look impressive for the Canucks to end up with Granlund and Shinkaruk -- reminding everyone that Benning won the Granny -- Shink trade. But, as @ThaManbeast says, there is just no room for him on the roster. With guys like Boeser, Virtanen, Rodin, and Burmistrov all contending for the last few spots I just don't see how Shink fits.

 

Shink is (another) classic example of a high skill guy who can score in Junior and in the AHL but whose game does not translate to the NHL. And if he can't play top 6, hard to see how hit fits.

Couldn't we claim him and then turn around and try to send him to Utica anyway? If someone else gets him fine but he could be back in our system. If he could elevate his game the way no one in Calgary thought Baer could it would be a nice thing for us. Cull seems like a level-headed coach who may be very good  for his development. 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Couldn't we claim him and then turn around and try to send him to Utica anyway? If someone else gets him fine but he could be back in our system. If he could elevate his game the way no one in Calgary thought Baer could it would be a nice thing for us. 

I think the rule is once you make a claim on waivers, the player has to stay active on the roster for 30 days before he can be sent down again.  And because he didn't clear the first time, or by waiver rules has spent 30 days on the NHL roster, he would have to go through waivers again to go down to the minors. Thus meaning he would be taking a spot from someone like Brock, Jake, Anton or others

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.