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

THIS IS THE DAY, Canucks get #7


TheGuardian_

Recommended Posts

Just now, aGENT said:

Do you only want people to know how much you don't? :P

 

Are you not excited about our prospects? Do you not want them developed properly? 

That's the beauty of it all...they have been developing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, aGENT said:

Yes, by sheltering them with vets and developing them at their respective level and pace...

It's a good thing they played in Europe because they would have been sitting in the press box or on the bench watching LE and Gagner play...sheltering them to 2nd, 3rd and 6th to last place finishes in a losing environment.

 

Hopefully they prove themselves during preseason and management actually picks them to make the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pete M said:

Sure, but its a catch 22, the best way to develop is to play more minutes, which they did at the end and they were winning...go figure.

You're confusing cause and effect.  Why didn't the Oilers prospects thrive when they were thrown right in with loads of ice-time, if they were given what you claim to be "the best way to develop"?  There is literally ZERO question in the Canucks prospects' case (as just one example) that they were given more icetime ONLY once they earned it.  The coach repeated that fact ad nauseum and limited them until they performed the way he demanded and expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said:

You're confusing cause and effect.  Why didn't the Oilers prospects thrive when they were thrown right in with loads of ice-time, if they were given what you claim to be "the best way to develop"?  There is literally ZERO question in the Canucks prospects' case (as just one example) that they were given more icetime ONLY once they earned it.  The coach repeated that fact ad nauseum and limited them until they performed the way he demanded and expected.

My 'iggy' finger is getting itchy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, oldnews said:

don't know, but what I do know is that there will definitely be talks / negotiations / a survey of the market.

I have to do some of that. 

 

Two seasons ago I was advocating for trading Hutton, Goldy and change for Edmondson and Lowry.

 

what about you, do you currently have your eye on anything?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

The overuse of the Oilers as an example for evething that has ever gone wrong with a player or team is nauseating. 

They make it so easy though with all the textbook examples of how to ruin a career, screw up development or mismanage a team.   If it annoys you that people like citing textbook examples, then provide an alternative that teaches the lesson equally well.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

They make it so easy though with all the textbook examples of how to ruin a career, screw up development or mismanage a team.   If it annoys you that people like citing textbook examples, then provide an alternative that teaches the lesson equally well.   

Worst case scenario, that is all they teach.

 

Hey, do you have any solid goaltending prospects picked out who the Canucks should target in the middle rounds? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pete M said:

It's a good thing they played in Europe because they would have been sitting in the press box or on the bench watching LE and Gagner play...sheltering them to 2nd, 3rd and 6th to last place finishes in a losing environment.

 

Hopefully they prove themselves during preseason and management actually picks them to make the team.

You mean no repeat of the Stecher fiasco?  Out play all our D, but get sent to the minors, and the coach says to you: "you shouldn't be here".  You mean that kind of stuff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Worst case scenario, that is all they teach.

 

Hey, do you have any solid goaltending prospects picked out who the Canucks should target in the middle rounds? 

Yes and no.   A lot of quantity but nothing stands out yet.   I am attending a combine with some of the goalie prospects post CHL season and will get some better thoughts then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I have to do some of that. 

 

Two seasons ago I was advocating for trading Hutton, Goldy and change for Edmondson and Lowry.

 

what about you, do you currently have your eye on anything?

 

 

I want things that will likely be very difficult to pry from their teams - players that an asset like Baertschi (who I think may be the most logical piece to dangle) - likely won't get talks started.

 

Lowry

Jenner

 

If we're willing to add a 2nd to a deal, we still might not have a viable package - but you never know.....We might be able to land a player like those (but unfortunately Hutton's regression doesn't help, nor does the timing, as he's become a fractional add-in to any package deal at this point, and I think he's the other clear candidate to be gone by opening night (aside from Gagner).   If they were to sign a FA like Kane (I suspect he may wind up back in SJ) then taking a loss on a player like Baertschi won't matter much (if they elected to move him for a pick or w.h.y.).

 

So, barring the pipe dreams, perhaps a deal like Hutton to Buffalo for Justin Bailey (something that is a retread as I proposed this at the deadline as well).   Looking around the league, not sure how many teams could use a Hutton - for how many would he be an upgrade on their third pairing?   Buffalo may be an exception, and have guys like Gorges and Falk expiring.  They also don't have much emerging in their system - their AHL team is littered with journeymen, and their one true D prospect has graduated (Guhle).

There may be a chance of finding a fit/dance partner there.

 

Barring those types of moves, I think the alternative is to simply go to free agency looking to sign one of the solid veteran depth centers and solid faceoff guys that will likely be on the market July 1st to a short term deal.    Richardson, Beagle, Letestu, Derek Ryan, Grant, Vermette, Stajan.   I imagine there will be a lot of "no placeholder" sentiment out there, but looking realistically at the team as is, I think they could use another hard minutes veteran to complement Sutter and hopefully free up the youth in the top 6 to get a decent amount of ozone opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

You mean no repeat of the Stecher fiasco?  Out play all our D, but get sent to the minors, and the coach says to you: "you shouldn't be here".  You mean that kind of stuff?

Exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about Alf, and those who are defending management tend to ignore or sweep under the rug.

 

It is almost like they are paid to defend management...because they sure are sticking to their narrative and trying to distort facts. When the facts are in plain view (i.e., Stecher fiasco. losing seasons for the last 3 years, etc, etc.

 

and the Edmonton Oiler example of developing players is nauseating. Not all 1st round picks turn out. The Oilers trading Taylor Hall is just poor management...has nothing to do with player development...and picking Lucic ....bad management...nothing to do with player development. Paying their first round picks $6M per season after their 3rd year...bad management...which is cause and effect to players thinking they are good before they reach their potential...the Oiler example is more about bad management, then about player development.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Lowry

Jenner

 

(aside from Gagner)

I doubt we'd be able to nab Lowry unfortunately. Anything we'd be willing to give up, they don't need. And anything they need, we'd be hard pressed to give up. But by all means, I'd be happy if Benning surprised me there.

 

I think Jenner could theoretically be attainable though. And speaking of Gagner, he had success there last year under Torts in what is presently the 'Vanek' role. And they have Calvert, Vanek and Letestu all expiring and Jenner likely due sizable (if not overwhelming raise)...

 

Perhaps something around Gagner with 50% cap retention to make him EXTRA affordable to one of the thriftier teams? Add in Granlund to replace some of Jenner's 2 way ability (and at least some ability to play C)? That, along with a couple of their improving kids (notably PLD) should be able to handily fill those spots and Gagner @50% + Granlund are likely less combined cap than Jenner re-signs for...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about Alf, and those who are defending management tend to ignore or sweep under the rug.

 

It is almost like they are paid to defend management...because they sure are sticking to their narrative and trying to distort facts. When the facts are in plain view (i.e., Stecher fiasco. losing seasons for the last 3 years, etc, etc.

 

and the Edmonton Oiler example of developing players is nauseating. Not all 1st round picks turn out. The Oilers trading Taylor Hall is just poor management...has nothing to do with player development...and picking Lucic ....bad management...nothing to do with player development. Paying their first round picks $6M per season after their 3rd year...bad management...which is cause and effect to players thinking they are good before they reach their potential...the Oiler example is more about bad management, then about player development.

 

 

Stecher played 71 of 82 games that season.

 

Again, false narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I doubt we'd be able to nab Lowry unfortunately. Anything we'd be willing to give up, they don't need. And anything they need, we'd be hard pressed to give up. But by all means, I'd be happy if Benning surprised me there.

 

I think Jenner could theoretically be attainable though. And speaking of Gagner, he had success there last year under Torts in what is presently the 'Vanek' role. And they have Calvert, Vanek and Letestu all expiring and Jenner likely due sizable (if not overwhelming raise)...

 

Perhaps something around Gagner with 50% cap retention to make him EXTRA affordable to one of the thriftier teams? Add in Granlund to replace some of Jenner's 2 way ability (and at least some ability to play C)? That, along with a couple of their improving kids (notably PLD) should be able to handily fill those spots and Gagner @50% + Granlund are likely less combined cap than Jenner re-signs for...

 

I don't think a deal involving Gagner  to Columbus is realistic.

I also wouldn't be shopping Granlund as opposed to Baertschi - imo Baertschi is more likely to become a difficult fit than Granlund.  If SB loses his top 6 LW spot to (ie to Leipsic and Pettersson) - then he becomes a more difficult fit than Granlund - who can play center or wing on any of the bottom 3 lines.

 

Asking Columbus to split assets to move Jenner though - not sure why they would -- they're really just needing to fill a couple bottom six spots and have players like Hannikainen and Sedlak .  They'll probably just to to UFA for a depth forward or two to replace Calvert/Letestu - that is if they don't bring those guys back,   I also think you might be over-stating Jenner's "sizable raise" on 2.9 million - imo part of what makes him attractive is/was the potential 'buy-low' aspect as a result of his role and production changing/decreasing - and suspect that could/will come into effect when it comes to him re-signing.

 

It's the contingency around re-signing Stastny that could make it interesting in Winnipeg - if they bring him back, their cap gets tighter - whether that would create a window of opportunity who knows, but any team in that situation can always use futures.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about Alf, and those who are defending management tend to ignore or sweep under the rug.

 

It is almost like they are paid to defend management...because they sure are sticking to their narrative and trying to distort facts. When the facts are in plain view (i.e., Stecher fiasco. losing seasons for the last 3 years, etc, etc.

 

and the Edmonton Oiler example of developing players is nauseating. Not all 1st round picks turn out. The Oilers trading Taylor Hall is just poor management...has nothing to do with player development...and picking Lucic ....bad management...nothing to do with player development. Paying their first round picks $6M per season after their 3rd year...bad management...which is cause and effect to players thinking they are good before they reach their potential...the Oiler example is more about bad management, then about player development.

 

 

Why is our big Russian not here anymore?  One could certainly argue bad management, right?  It's frustrating to see a (potentially) very important piece on our blue-line leave because he and his very young and pregnant wife were not cared for properly.  

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...