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

[Trade] Canucks trade Thomas Vanek to Blue Jackets for Jussi Jokinen, Tyler Motte


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Horvat has done a lot of things in his young career that look good but consistent defense is not one of them.   He is far more of an "offense first" player.   He needs a lot of work on his defensive game to get remotely close to "good defensive" forward.   He is decent on draws but is constantly in offense mode and it shows on some missed coverages leading to his rather poor defensive stats.   He is a creative offensive talent who, like the team, continues to grow into his role.   Give him 82 games with two good wingers (say Boeser and Baer for 82 games) and his offensive stats will show up just fine.

Also under Willie, he was an awesome defensive forward.  He was deployed in that role, and his wingers reflected it.  He was an All-star.  I am not saying Willie is a better coach than Green.  What I am saying is that Green is trying to put Bo into more offensive situations to develop that side of his game more.  Bo scored a lot off the rush with Willie. In contrast,  a lot of his scoring this year was on the powerplay. 

 

I really like Sutter, but to me Bo is just like Kesler.  He is fast.  Does best scoring of the rush.  Isnt a great playmaker.  I will say that I think Bo is better offensively and Kesler is better defensively, but Bo still has time to catch up defensively.  I dont think the team needs both Bo and Sutter.  You dont need two shutdown lines.  I like Sutter.  I think he is a really solid hockey player.  But I just dont see a need for two, and I do see Horvat as a shutdown center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I really like Sutter, but to me Bo is just like Kesler.  He is fast.  Does best scoring of the rush.  Isnt a great playmaker.  I will say that I think Bo is better offensively and Kesler is better defensively, but Bo still has time to catch up defensively.  I dont think the team needs both Bo and Sutter.  You dont need two shutdown lines.  I like Sutter.  I think he is a really solid hockey player.  But I just dont see a need for two, and I do see Horvat as a shutdown center.

Bo tends to try to do too much himself, but he is a FAR better playmaker than Kesler, who became a black hole here whenever he had the puck.  He may not ever score 40 (Kesler only ever got to 30 once himself, and cleared 60 points but twice) but his production is already well-ahead of where Kesler was at the same age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hutton Wink said:

Bo tends to try to do too much himself, but he is a FAR better playmaker than Kesler, who became a black hole here whenever he had the puck.  He may not ever score 40 (Kesler only ever got to 30 once himself, and cleared 60 points but twice) but his production is already well-ahead of where Kesler was at the same age.

I agree with this in its entirety.  My only point is that I still see Horvat as more Kesler than Giroux.  More Bergeron than Backstrom.  I like Sutter as winger but, with how good he is on faceoffs, I would guess he is more valuable to someone else as a C than the Canucks as a RW.  Horvat is an ideal matchup center.  Barkov, Kopitar and Couturier also generate offense.  I know he isnt as good as those three, but he still has upside.  The Kings, Panthers and Flyers use those three in the matchup role against top lines and not another checking center.  This would be my strong preference.  Horvat is a horse.  He can play 20 minutes against top forwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

I wonder if this is the way conversations go for you in real life?  You have one mode hammer.

Actually, that was a pretty "soft-cell" response to your bait-and-switch.   Again, I don't see the 'nuance' in your response.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

Also under Willie, he was an awesome defensive forward.  He was deployed in that role, and his wingers reflected it.  He was an All-star.  I am not saying Willie is a better coach than Green.  What I am saying is that Green is trying to put Bo into more offensive situations to develop that side of his game more.  Bo scored a lot off the rush with Willie. In contrast,  a lot of his scoring this year was on the powerplay. 

 

I really like Sutter, but to me Bo is just like Kesler.  He is fast.  Does best scoring of the rush.  Isnt a great playmaker.  I will say that I think Bo is better offensively and Kesler is better defensively, but Bo still has time to catch up defensively.  I dont think the team needs both Bo and Sutter.  You dont need two shutdown lines.  I like Sutter.  I think he is a really solid hockey player.  But I just dont see a need for two, and I do see Horvat as a shutdown center.

The thing is - Bergeron is a capable shutdown center - elite possession player that can handle matchups, dzone starts, elite faceoff guy....but he's not utilized as a shutdown center, at least not any longer. 

He had 59.4% offensive zone starts this year.

That he's a very good defensive center - arguably Selke quality - doesn't mean that you don't need other good defensive centers in your lineup.

 

Bergeron being a great two way player only makes him that much better of a linemate for the scoring wingers he plays with.

He limits opposition possession - which means more possession for the Pastrnak and Marchand types on his wing.  That defensive ability generates more offense - it doesn't limit it, as a lot of people imo mistakenly perceive - that two-way players limit production by focusing too much on defense.  I think that is an oversimplification.

I also think the team certainly needs a Sutter and a Horvat, particularly if you don't want Horvat tied to too many hard minutes.

 

Sutter's is a shutdown line (at 22% ozone starts) - Horvat's is not realy (49%).

 

I don't see Horvat and Kesler as comparables - at all.  Kesler was unable to make his linemates better - he depended on the creativity of his linemates - otherwise he lacked vision, he lacked playmaking ability and he lacked creativity.  He squeezed his stick tighter than practically any player I can think of.   His stick is where possession went to die.

 

And even in Kesler's time here, the team did in fact have (another) shutdown line - that was Malhotra's line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Bo tends to try to do too much himself, but he is a FAR better playmaker than Kesler, who became a black hole here whenever he had the puck.  He may not ever score 40 (Kesler only ever got to 30 once himself, and cleared 60 points but twice) but his production is already well-ahead of where Kesler was at the same age.

Agree. I'd say Bo adapts his game situationally(linemates; what his coaches need). He should consistently be a 30/30 man, especially if EP arrives as advertised(which spreads out 2 lines ice time).

 

At his peak with prime ice time, wouldn't be surprised to see Bo have 1 or 2 40/40 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

The thing is - Bergeron is a capable shutdown center - elite possession player that can handle matchups, dzone starts, elite faceoff guy....but he's not utilized as a shutdown center, at least not any longer. 

He had 59.4% offensive zone starts this year.

That he's a very good defensive center - arguably Selke quality - doesn't mean that you don't need other good defensive centers in your lineup.

 

Bergeron being a great two way player only makes him that much better of a linemate for the scoring wingers he plays with.

He limits opposition possession - which means more possession for the Pastrnak and Marchand types on his wing.  That defensive ability generates more offense - it doesn't limit it, as a lot of people imo mistakenly perceive - that two-way players limit production by focusing too much on defense.  I think that is an oversimplification.

I also think the team certainly needs a Sutter and a Horvat, particularly if you don't want Horvat tied to too many hard minutes.

 

Sutter's is a shutdown line (at 22% ozone starts) - Horvat's is not realy (49%).

 

I don't see Horvat and Kesler as comparables - at all.  Kesler was unable to make his linemates better - he depended on the creativity of his linemates - otherwise he lacked vision, he lacked playmaking ability and he lacked creativity.  He squeezed his stick tighter than practically any player I can think of.   His stick is where possession went to die.

 

And even in Kesler's time here, the team did in fact have (another) shutdown line - that was Malhotra's line.

That’s a very fair argument to make.  I am not saying Bergeron, Barkov, Couturier, Kopitar make their line mates worse offensively.  I am also not saying Horvat is a Kesler clone.  They do have some very clear comparable skills namely defense, faceoffs, speed, ability to score off the rush.  I agree that Horvat is a better offensive player than Kesler ever was, but I do think Horvat's skills make him an excellent defensive centreman.

 

I do also think the concept of space is lost on a lot of pure hockey guys.  Now I don’t know what sports you follow (so I apologize if I am not characterizing your opinions correctly), but I watch a lot of European Football.  Players whose main asset is their speed play very well on the counter.  Horvat is a lot more effective on the counter.  I don’t think that the defensive zone starts and harder minutes is actually an overall negative to his offensive production as it puts him in the situations where he can take advantage of his main offensive skills: speed and his ability to beat defenders one on one.  To me he isn't Kesler esque, but He doesn’t really look comfortable in a half-court offense.  Yes, I know he has scored a lot of goals on PP this year, but thats mostly infront of the net instead of making decisions with puck on stick.

 

Also if it makes sense to play Sutter 12-14 minutes per night in a 4th line PK role then sure, but I have to think that a valuable player like him would be worth it to a team who may have a surplus of offensive defensemen.  Like a Vatanen and Henrique type of deal.   I know Sutter isn’t a direct comparison, but something like that…

 

I would really like for the team to focus more on plugging the offensive holes.  The style of play is incredibly predictable because there are no skilled offensive defensemen on this team.  A playmaking center that can skate would also be a big plus.  Fingers crossed Petterson…I think its time to stop accumulating assets and to start molding a team.  Where are the holes?  Lets start to address some needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

That’s a very fair argument to make.  I am not saying Bergeron, Barkov, Couturier, Kopitar make their line mates worse offensively.  I am also not saying Horvat is a Kesler clone.  They do have some very clear comparable skills namely defense, faceoffs, speed, ability to score off the rush.  I agree that Horvat is a better offensive player than Kesler ever was, but I do think Horvat's skills make him an excellent defensive centreman.

 

I do also think the concept of space is lost on a lot of pure hockey guys.  Now I don’t know what sports you follow (so I apologize if I am not characterizing your opinions correctly), but I watch a lot of European Football.  Players whose main asset is their speed play very well on the counter.  Horvat is a lot more effective on the counter.  I don’t think that the defensive zone starts and harder minutes is actually an overall negative to his offensive production as it puts him in the situations where he can take advantage of his main offensive skills: speed and his ability to beat defenders one on one.  To me he isn't Kesler esque, but He doesn’t really look comfortable in a half-court offense.  Yes, I know he has scored a lot of goals on PP this year, but thats mostly infront of the net instead of making decisions with puck on stick.

 

Also if it makes sense to play Sutter 12-14 minutes per night in a 4th line PK role then sure, but I have to think that a valuable player like him would be worth it to a team who may have a surplus of offensive defensemen.  Like a Vatanen and Henrique type of deal.   I know Sutter isn’t a direct comparison, but something like that…

 

I would really like for the team to focus more on plugging the offensive holes.  The style of play is incredibly predictable because there are no skilled offensive defensemen on this team.  A playmaking center that can skate would also be a big plus.  Fingers crossed Petterson…I think its time to stop accumulating assets and to start molding a team.  Where are the holes?  Lets start to address some needs.

Horvat being a good rush and counterpunch scorer doesn't necessarily mean you want him in a shutdown role though.  I've argued the same about him on these boards - which is why I think in due course you might find him playing with a winger like Virtanen consistently - they'd make a great dual purpose line that can match up against other top 6 lines, play both shutdown and be a serious threat in the process.  In today's NHL it's more and more the case that oppostion teams have two or three lines that can pose a threat, particularly the good, deep teams.  You're going to need more than a shutdown line to contend with them - and ideally you have that secondary 'Kesler' type line that can provide that.  I don't disagree with you in general, aside from the point that the team ought to deal someone like Sutter and insert Horvat into his role in order to add scoring.   And I think the truly effective shutdown guys are highly under-rated.  I don't play or particularly like soccer, but I have played lots of sports and one thing that is true of all of them - playing defense is generally the most difficult and challenging aspect of the game, for a number of reasons.   The 'offensive' team / team with possession gets to dictate to a certain extent - they have a time and space edge - to which the defender has to 'react' / overcome.  That is a large part of the reason you see a shift in modern defenses - in various sports - towards attacking - in order to disrupt, and ideally intervene in possession, and ideally as far from one's zone/goal/basket as possible.  If you take a sport like the NFL, it's widely realized that the best athletes in the game tend to be the defensive backs - the safeties, and particularly the cornerbacks - who have arguably the most challenging roles in the game.  In hockey it isn't necessarily all that different.  In the past defensive players may have tended to be undervalued, but in today's game the Patrice Bergeron types, and the Yzerman or Datsyuk type players before him - the truly two way players tend to be regarded as the best in the game - and without that element, probably shouldn't be in the running.

 

Horvat is centering guys like Baertschi/Leipsic and Boeser this year - none of those are 'shutdown' wingers - quite the opposite - Horvat is the backbone type center in that role, which is why I tried to illustrate what Bergeron does as a top line center, which may not be the obvious or even first characterization of him, but the effect and results are undeniable.   His line has been dominant, whether or not people perceive him as a 'true 1C' type.

 

I think those scoring roles you want filled are the task of players like Pettersson, Dahlen, Lind, Gaudette, Goldobin et al to fill - dealing a Sutter imo is counterintuitive and I think it's a misread of the types of youth and prospects the team has.  The team doesn't have a plethora of bottom six types and a lack of skilled forwards - they actually have a good balance (if anything they could stand to add more heaviness to the group as opposed to skill, if those are to be opposed) -  and regardless, in the end you want every single player on your roster to be a' two way player' - that's the nature of the modern game.   Even your snipers like Boeser need to be responsible without the puck (one of the things that made him even more impressive imo, and enabled Green to feed him so much ice time so early in his career - he actually has a well-developed game without possession - a mature, defensive hockey intelligence that serves himself and his team.

 

I think the team should stay the course.  They'll need a player like Pettersson to emerge as their primary scoring, top line threat.  If that doesn't happen, they still have the Horvat - Bergeron type option - a two-way prototypical "2C" - something that may be shifting in the landscape of the modern game - a one way 1C is not necessarily a prerequisite in team-building.

If someone steps into a primary scoring role, they'll be well-built up front with Horvat being an ideal 2C type - that will still bring that two way game and help enable secondary scoring, and they'll have the Sutter line to come in behind both, handle the dzone starts, and generate the territory for the other lines to take advantage of.  But really, we're seeing 4th lines that can play, more depth of skill in the league, and less convention in team-building.  Personally I think the last thing they should do is move towards having one line - Horvat's - that can handle hard minutes.  If anything I'd add another depth veteran center that can handle dzone starts and win draws and utilize them to further free up both Horvat's line, and whoever emerges as their other top 6 scoring line.   In the present - with the roster they have,  I think Granlund probably best fits that role until one of the high end offensive talents possibly pushes Horvat to 2C....

 

In any event, they're addressing those needs imo but not just through the trade market (not a fan of the trade Sutter idea) - I think their drafting is starting to emerge and will continue to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

Horvat being a good rush and counterpunch scorer doesn't necessarily mean you want him in a shutdown role though.  I've argued the same about him on these boards - which is why I think in due course you might find him playing with a winger like Virtanen consistently - they'd make a great dual purpose line that can match up against other top 6 lines, play both shutdown and be a serious threat in the process.  In today's NHL it's more and more the case that oppostion teams have two or three lines that can pose a threat, particularly the good, deep teams.  You're going to need more than a shutdown line to contend with them - and ideally you have that secondary 'Kesler' type line that can provide that.  I don't disagree with you in general, aside from the point that the team ought to deal someone like Sutter and insert Horvat into his role in order to add scoring.   And I think the truly effective shutdown guys are highly under-rated.  I don't play or particularly like soccer, but I have played lots of sports and one thing that is true of all of them - playing defense is generally the most difficult and challenging aspect of the game, for a number of reasons.   The 'offensive' team / team with possession gets to dictate to a certain extent - they have a time and space edge - to which the defender has to 'react' / overcome.  That is a large part of the reason you see a shift in modern defenses - in various sports - towards attacking - in order to disrupt, and ideally intervene in possession, and ideally as far from one's zone/goal/basket as possible.  If you take a sport like the NFL, it's widely realized that the best athletes in the game tend to be the defensive backs - the safeties, and particularly the cornerbacks - who have arguably the most challenging roles in the game.  In hockey it isn't necessarily all that different.  In the past defensive players may have tended to be undervalued, but in today's game the Patrice Bergeron types, and the Yzerman or Datsyuk type players before him - the truly two way players tend to be regarded as the best in the game - and without that element, probably shouldn't be in the running.

 

Horvat is centering guys like Baertschi/Leipsic and Boeser this year - none of those are 'shutdown' wingers - quite the opposite - Horvat is the backbone type center in that role, which is why I tried to illustrate what Bergeron does as a top line center, which may not be the obvious or even first characterization of him, but the effect and results are undeniable.   His line has been dominant, whether or not people perceive him as a 'true 1C' type.

 

I think those scoring roles you want filled are the task of players like Pettersson, Dahlen, Lind, Gaudette, Goldobin et al to fill - dealing a Sutter imo is counterintuitive and I think it's a misread of the types of youth and prospects the team has.  The team doesn't have a plethora of bottom six types and a lack of skilled forwards - they actually have a good balance (if anything they could stand to add more heaviness to the group as opposed to skill, if those are to be opposed) -  and regardless, in the end you want every single player on your roster to be a' two way player' - that's the nature of the modern game.   Even your snipers like Boeser need to be responsible without the puck (one of the things that made him even more impressive imo, and enabled Green to feed him so much ice time so early in his career - he actually has a well-developed game without possession - a mature, defensive hockey intelligence that serves himself and his team.

 

I think the team should stay the course.  They'll need a player like Pettersson to emerge as their primary scoring, top line threat.  If that doesn't happen, they still have the Horvat - Bergeron type option - a two-way prototypical "2C" - something that may be shifting in the landscape of the modern game - a one way 1C is not necessarily a prerequisite in team-building.

If someone steps into a primary scoring role, they'll be well-built up front with Horvat being an ideal 2C type - that will still bring that two way game and help enable secondary scoring, and they'll have the Sutter line to come in behind both, handle the dzone starts, and generate the territory for the other lines to take advantage of.  But really, we're seeing 4th lines that can play, more depth of skill in the league, and less convention in team-building.  Personally I think the last thing they should do is move towards having one line - Horvat's - that can handle hard minutes.  If anything I'd add another depth veteran center that can handle dzone starts and win draws and utilize them to further free up both Horvat's line, and whoever emerges as their other top 6 scoring line.   In the present - with the roster they have,  I think Granlund probably best fits that role until one of the high end offensive talents possibly pushes Horvat to 2C....

 

In any event, they're addressing those needs imo but not just through the trade market (not a fan of the trade Sutter idea) - I think their drafting is starting to emerge and will continue to.

I think we agree more than we disagree.  I also think Horvat and Virtanen would prove a very effective pairing expressly because they are both so good on the counter.  When you play that way it is more important that your winger can keep up rather than providing a complimentary skill set.  Baertschi is good in traffic; but not very fast, soft on the forecheck and inadequate defensively.  He is better with Vanek, Boeser or someone who can finish his creativity and ability to play in tight in the middle of the ice.  Its more important that defensively that same threat is provided by all three forward positions that way one player isn’t chasing while the other two just play their position and stand around in their own zone.  Defense is very difficult, but I have to disagree with you here.  Again, in non-salary cap European sports there is a huge discrepancy between top teams and the rest because of money.  It is still incredibly difficult to score when someone literally "parks the bus".  In Soccer this means playing all of your players including the forwards in front of the ball at all times defending in your own zone.  To me this is like an offensive zone start.  All defenders start immediately in the best positions possible.  It is their job at that point to simply not screw up.  Now I know that isn’t as easy as I am making it sound, but breaking down someone who is already prepared for it is very challenging instead of doing the opposite by allowing someone to attack you and then simply creating an odd man rush the other way when they make a mistake a bad Henrik Sedin or Alex Edler pass.  This is the one thing that always got me livid on this forum.  Offensive zone turnovers are not bonehead plays.  It is very difficult to beat a professional athlete when they are in tight defensive formation prepared and ready for you to attack.  You can't simply pass through a player or shoot through a player.  You have to create an opening.  The only way to do that when you are already in the offensive zone is to pass the puck as it can move faster than the defenders feet.  Even that is not enough most of the time.  In half court offense eventually you have to either shoot for a rebound, to score or force a puck into traffic; all of which have high probabilities for counter attacks.  This is why playmaking skills are so absolutely crucial for players that receive the bulk of the offensive zone starts.  I think out of all of Horvat's skills this is his weakest; therefore, I would rather not give him many offensive zone starts.  He is also not a great perimeter shooter like Boeser or Vanek.  I would love to see a shutdown line of Virtanen-Horvat-Eriksson. 

 

Hockey is a unique sport as it takes time to pivot and explode with speed.  You really cant do it in the offensive zone.  You have to receive the puck in the neutral zone or even in your own zone to build up your speed or take a pass already in stride.  That being said why negate Horvat's best asset by giving him less space in which to accelerate?

 

Horvat was playing with shutdown wingers last year.  He didn’t this year.  I made that distinction.  I think that Green definitely sees this more your way than mine.  He wants to either develop Horvat's offensive ability by partnering him with these kinds of players and giving him offensive zone starts or he already believes he is that kind of player.

 

Bergeron plays with two very high end offensive players.  He is a compliment on that line.  He also allows the coach to go first line versus first line.  That to me is what I would like Horvat to be.  I am not saying I see him as a 3rd line player.  I do believe he is a top 2 forward on this team.  Ideally he is Kopitar playing against the other teams best all night and still generating offense and scoring.  Maybe this is your point after all that we simply need to find another dominant offensive forward to partner with him like Boeser to get our own version of Boston's top line.

 

I do think size is important but more in the Detriot way than the LA way.  I would like to see one 220 pound forward on the top 3 lines each rather than trying to make as large a team as possible.  For me this is about offensive variation.  Part of the reason the defensemen don't score on this team is that there is very little net front presence.  This also creates more pressure all over the ice as the defensemen on the other team dont really need to stay around the net.  More aggressive defensive play leads to more offensive zone turnovers.  All these things are related.

 

I get the need to have everyone be responsible to a certain extent in their own zone, but I do think at some point the Canucks are coaching the offense out of the kids.  Offense is about doing the unpredictable.  Yes the drop pass at center ice doesnt work when you dont have chemistry with a team only having played a handful of games, but its precisely the unexpected that creates openings.  Goldobin is the most gifted offensive mind this team has had in a while.  He needs confidence and chemistry.  Both of those things need time and trust.  I get he is tissue paper soft and looks uninterested defensively, but there has to be an effort made to make him an NHL hockey player.  You dont get many cracks at this kind of a skill set.  If he could only find chemistry with Boeser or Petterson that would be game changing.  He has fantastic skills.

 

A guy like Granlund is average at everything except for his shot which is definitely above average.  This is not a knock on him as he is playing on bottom feeder team.  We could use more average.  I feel the same way about most forwards on the team.  Even Gagner is a lot more engaged physically and defensively than I remember him with the Oilers.  From what I see, which again I am open to being wrong on this, is that the team has 3 lines worth of players that could play on a checking line.  Maybe they are not elite defensively but when you think of Gaunce, Granlund, Eriksson, Motte, Archibald, Sutter, Dowd, Virtanen, Horvat, even Leipsic ( to an extent although he posses a broader skill set) I think checking line. 

 

I wouldn't rate any of them as playmakers.  I wouldn't try to start any of them in the offensive zone if I had other options.  I would also think they would all be better on the rush receiving a pass from a defender that can actually make that pass.  I look at the personnel group, and I just dont see a defensive player who can make a great first pass other than Edler or Pouliot.  Pouliot gets bullied in his own zone, so he rarely has the time and space to make the pass.  There also isnt a player to skate puck out of the zone.  Del Zotto is the only guy who can shoot a puck although Edler looked like 2011 Edler on that front this year.

 

Baertschi, Gagner and Boeser are the three best passers on the roster now.  They are all 2nd or third line material at best in that skill set.  That is worrying to me.  Leipsic is a creative player, but he again likes to play off the rush.  He is quick, great one on one, and has a decent shot.  Maybe what I am getting at is there needs to be someone with size who can hold off a defender and make a pass.  A player who can cycle and forecheck and come out with a puck and make a pass (Vanek).  That player is non-existent on this roster.  That again makes the attack very predictable and even difficult to execute consider the lack of passing ability in the defense.

 

The skimmed version of this entire post is:  We have some good players, but they have to fit together.  This team is not bottom ten in talent.  Jim has actually stockpiled a decent roster.  The team is just really disjointed.  I know you may not see it that way, and I genuinely appreciate the discussion.  It's not about getting rid of Sutter for the sake of it.  It's about actually trading from a perceived area of strength for something that is needed.  There may not be a large market for him then I say keep him.  I certainly wouldn't trade him for a draft pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, oldnews said:

The thing is - Bergeron is a capable shutdown center - elite possession player that can handle matchups, dzone starts, elite faceoff guy....but he's not utilized as a shutdown center, at least not any longer. 

He had 59.4% offensive zone starts this year.

That he's a very good defensive center - arguably Selke quality - doesn't mean that you don't need other good defensive centers in your lineup.

 

Bergeron being a great two way player only makes him that much better of a linemate for the scoring wingers he plays with.

He limits opposition possession - which means more possession for the Pastrnak and Marchand types on his wing.  That defensive ability generates more offense - it doesn't limit it, as a lot of people imo mistakenly perceive - that two-way players limit production by focusing too much on defense.  I think that is an oversimplification.

I also think the team certainly needs a Sutter and a Horvat, particularly if you don't want Horvat tied to too many hard minutes.

 

Sutter's is a shutdown line (at 22% ozone starts) - Horvat's is not realy (49%).

 

I don't see Horvat and Kesler as comparables - at all.  Kesler was unable to make his linemates better - he depended on the creativity of his linemates - otherwise he lacked vision, he lacked playmaking ability and he lacked creativity.  He squeezed his stick tighter than practically any player I can think of.   His stick is where possession went to die.

 

And even in Kesler's time here, the team did in fact have (another) shutdown line - that was Malhotra's line.

Don't forget Lapierre's line with Torres and Hansen. That line would probably go down as one if not the best 3rd line in Canucks history. The most consistent line in the 2011 playoffs and scored HUGE timely goals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm up for talking smack to anyone so short-sighted that they can't imagine Motte being integral to the growth of a group. Be that in the season or playoffs.

 

We have ample proof that a very similar player in Hansen turned out to be as such. The parallels are clear to me.

 

This incessant need to have every F player be top 6 or bust in the system is, actually, nauseating. You don't build a team with potential only, you build it with people

 

The kid skates at above current NHL pace, he has good habits on and off (I've checked), forechecks and finishes checks, is committed to PKing, makes sneaky good passes and plays, but has work to do on being a consistent scorer. Like Hansen. Like Burrows.

 

The stupidity by certain members of the media that he's 'too old to be core' is asinine. Core is subtle and 'foundational.' Your core extends beyond the showy muscles... that opinion is like dudes who only work biceps. 

 

 Come at me bro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To go along with those two giant posts up above... could you imagine if everything worked out perfectly in a couple years our top 6 being

 

Dahlen - Pettersson - Boeser

Kane*- Horvat - Virtanen

 

droools haha

 

The only reason I went with Kane was because, I love the idea of Virtanen and Horvat together because of their speed and defensive play... but I couldnt think of a current winger on the Canucks that could match them for speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, coryberg said:

So 1 great game and then disappeared for the rest of the series. Poor Thomas missed his shot to prove the naysayers wrong.

Was just going to ask this. So confirmed he disappeared again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RRypien37 said:

Was just going to ask this. So confirmed he disappeared again?

Had 0 points, was a -2 and had only 9 shots total in his last 5 games. Torts only gave him 8:35 ice time in his final game... literally disappeared :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, coryberg said:

Had 0 points, was a -2 and had only 9 shots total in his last 5 games. Torts only gave him 8:35 ice time in his final game... literally disappeared :(

Vanek should return to play for us, if he can earn his spot back. He was really good with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Vanek should return to play for us, if he can earn his spot back. He was really good with us.

While I liked Vanek's season to resign him would mean other forward vets would have to be moved to make room. The big question is how many vets do you carry. For sure I would move Gagner either by trade or buy-out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

While I liked Vanek's season to resign him would mean other forward vets would have to be moved to make room. The big question is how many vets do you carry. For sure I would move Gagner either by trade or buy-out. 

I wholeheartedly agree. Gagner has not played well, but he is not a HUGE overpayment either, like Eriksson has been. That being said, Eriksson is trying - the Sedins were not the same players that they once were.

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...