Canucks roster year end grades

[250Integra]

Archibald: B

Played surprisingly well and added in some much need grit into our lineup.

Baertschi: C+

I don't even remember Baertschi playing much this season (aside from his OT goal). Don't think he took a step forward or backwards.

Biega: B-

A solid 7/8th defenseman. He does what he needs to do when he comes into the line up

Boeser: A+

I think he blew away everyone's expectations this year. Hopefully he'll follow it up with a solid sophomore campaign.

Boucher: C+

Good depth forward when injuries hit but really needs to work on his skating to be an everyday NHL player.

Burmistrov: F

Well that didn't last long.

Del Zotto: B-

MDZ was the only defenseman who stayed healthy all year. His defensive game is alright, but I was expecting more offense from him.

Dorsett: A-

Played some of his best hockey in the Blue and Green before getting shut down. We missed his energy and grit.

Dowd: C

Another decent depth forward when injuries hit. That's about it.

Edler: B+

Played some of his best hockey in many years especially down the stretch (albeit meaningless games). Consistently our best defenseman all year long.

Eriksson: C-

He played a bit better than last year if that means anything? yikes.

Gagner: C+

When he was with CBJ, he was stapled to the 4th line but played top PP time. That is how he should be deployed on this team. He has decent offensive abilities but his defensive game is lacking. Just too soft on most nights.

Gaunce: C+

I think Gaunce improved from last year and has shown to be relatively reliable on most nights. Hopefully he can chip in a few more goals next year.

Goldobin: B-

The last 5-10 games really showed how dangerous he can be in the offensive zone. Of course, his biggest weakness is on the defensive side, but that'll come with coaching and more ice-time. Hoping for a big off-season from him.

Granlund: C-

Took a big step backwards from last year. He played 50+ games but it felt like he only played around 30 or less. Not too many memorable nights.

Gudbranson: C

I enjoyed his leadership, tenacity, and physical presence, but he was fairly inconsistent all year long. Couldn't stay healthy as well.

Horvat: A

Easily the most important player on this team. Improved on all aspects of his game from last year and was sorely missed when he was injured (the team fell apart). He should be able to pot in 60-70 points next year if healthy.

Hutton: D

He is a likable guy but a big liability on the ice. Clearly did not take his job seriously this year with his conditioning. He needs to have a huge off-season to show he wants to play in this league.

Jokinen: B

Played very well in his short tenure here even though they were meaningless games. I would rather have him in the lineup than Eriksson.

Leipsic: B

I thought he was fun to watch and he brought some "swag" to our lineup. Can't wait to see him next year.

Markstrom: C-

Super inconsistent and too many soft goals on most nights. I was expecting more from Markstrom. That's all I can say.

Motte: C+

I thought Motte provided some much needed physicality and energy to our lineup. At this stage, he is a good depth player.

Nilsson: D

Like Markstrom, extremely inconsistent and too many soft goals. It's tough to win when we let in the first goal on so many nights.  

Pouliot: C 

Has the offensive skill and skating to play in this league, but he really needs to work on his decision-making skills and defensive awareness.

Daniel Sedin: B

Nothing to say other than thank you for all the memories.

Henrik Sedin: B-

Nothing to say other than thank you for all the memories. Daniel was better this year.

Stecher: B-

I don't think he took a step forward or a step back this year. Would like to see his offensive game grow but that may take a few years.

Sutter: B-

He was our best forward on some nights. Extremely reliable defensively but needs to learn how to use his line mates in the offensive zone.

Tanev: B-

Tanev was solid on most nights (as usual) but he needs to find a way to stay healthy.

Vanek: B

Great addition for this team solely because his presence and mentor ship was key to Brock's development. He was also one of the more dangerous forwards all season long.

Virtanen: C+

He really started to wake up after the trade deadline. I think Canucks fans should be happy with what he did during the last 10 games of the season. Needs to work on his shot and decision making, but he's trending in the right direction.

[smithers joe]

9 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

You don't seem to realize that Benning's had 4 years now. 

 

Dorsett
Sbisa
Bonino
Vey
Acton
Pedan
Clendening
Baertschi
Conacher
Prust
Sutter
Etem
Granlund
Larsen
Miller
Vrbata
McMillan
Bartkowski
Cracknell
Zalewski
Gudbranson
Dahlen
Goldobin
Pouliot
Dowd
Motte
Jokinen
Leipsic
8 draft picks in 2017
6 draft picks in 2016
7 draft picks in 2015
7 draft picks in 2014

 

There are only 20 to 23 spots on an NHL roster.  Benning's signed/traded for 28 players (and had another 28 draft picks on top of that). 

 

So, please tell me again how Benning hasn't had enough time to change our roster to his liking!

you forgot to mention how his future core, consists of pettersson, dahlen, lind, gaudette, gadjovich, demko, juolevi, boeser, virtanen and horvat.  some players were just placeholders until the young core can take over the team. every rebuild takes a different time line. .have some patience

[Nucker 67]

A+ - Boeser

A - Horvat, D. Sedin, Edler

B - Sutter, Vanek, Leipsic, Jokinen, Dorsett

C+ - Gagner, Baertschi, Virtanen, Tanev, Goldobin, Gaudette, Biega, Sautner

C - Archibald, Del Zotto, Markstrom, Motte, Gudbranson, Stecher, Pouliot

D - Granlund, Gaunce, Eriksson, Dowd, Boucher

F - Rodin, Burmistrov, Hutton, Nilsson

 

[Rob_Zepp]

5 hours ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

You are forgetting that management's job, first and foremost, is to ice a winning team, not build a prospect pool. 

Uh, how are those two unrelated.   How can you possible have a plan, say a five or six year plan (that is what it takes), without having some form of prospect pool to develop into that planned team?   You cannot ice a winning team when you start with an empty cupboard and an assortment of players who are past being able to do that winning.   That is impossible.    

 

Your management group has done things the right way - patiently.   One can argue (I have) that the owner pushed too hard in the first two years to try and do exactly what you are implying above and there simply was not sufficient depth on the team - plus arguably their best player demanded a trade and then forced it to be to one team and it is amazing your GM got ANYTHING out of that forced trade as Anaheim was holding all the cards.

[bloodycanuckleheads]

6 minutes ago, kloubek said:

I did.  You just didn't read.  Or perhaps you did, and you disagree.

 

So, are you denying that ownership stifled him in the rebuild?  Are you denying that we had very few prospects remaining?  Or are you denying the rebuilds typically take several years to complete?

 I did read.  You said, and I quote 'it takes time to flush the old team out'.  So, I listed at least 45 players Benning's signed/traded-for (none of which were prospects, these were all players on NHL contracts) - all for a 23 man roster.  He's flushed out the entire team literally twice over and he's got nothing but the guys he wants now.  And, the team is still god-awful.  The average career-length in the NHL is 5 years - Benning's had 4 already.  You can't keep blaming the last guy.  Benning's had more than enough time.

 

You claim that management forced his hand - well go look up Benning's quotes from 3 years ago, where he claims that our team just needs a few tweaks to get back to being a contender and how close we were to accomplishing that.  Every once in a while someone posts all of them - and they are utterly delusional (and actually quite shocking that our talent-evaluator of a GM had such a horrendously misguided view of our team's talent). 

 

Yes, rebuilds take years.  The thing is, if our GM was as competent as everyone here thinks he is, our rebuild would be over by now.  If Gillis was allowed to rebuild, our rebuild would be over by now.  But, it's not even close yet.  Our rebuild has already taken half a decade and we've still got quite a ways to go.  We have a chance this summer to tremendously accelerate the process (in another thread I showed how we can literally drop all our AHL caliber guys and ice a far, far, FAR better line-up next year, all it takes is a little bit of forethought) - and our management is talking about taking on cap-dumps and spending less instead.  They just don't ever see the big picture.

[Rob_Zepp]

29 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

 

 

So, please tell me again how Benning hasn't had enough time to change our roster to his liking!

 

People have been but, perhaps it is because your head is bleeding/bloody, you simply are not listening.

 

Most of Bennings moves have been to simply fill an NHL roster.   He had not number one picks.  He had no elite players to use for trading.   He had spare parts and an empty cupboard and the first two years an owner that wanted to still win and they did one of those years.   It takes draft picks a few years to find their bearings - expecting most kids to carry a team before 21-22 is pretty unreasonable unless there is already a strong supporting cast.    

 

The changeover of this team has actually been pretty quick and with the talent now in the prospect pool, the steady development of Horvat, Virtanen, Stetcher and others and the upcoming picks and potential trades (he finally has some semblance of depth to work from), you can see a direction.   The team is so much faster than it was even just two years ago.   They had freakishly bad injury luck this year (for example, pucks that simply took on a life of their own to take out players) and still were a more up-tempo team that was noticeably in far more games than they were not.   With even marginally better goaltending, in spite of the injuries, they were probably mid-80s for points and some ability to have had their top 4 D together more than a handful of games and their top line together more than 1/2 a season you may be talking non-lottery (so in some ways, it was a good thing about the injuries as this team is NOT ready to do damage in playoffs, even if fully healthy).

 

Your impatience is impressive.   Again, perhaps it is same reason you cannot hear properly - that bloody head thing you have.  Maybe you should see someone about that?   

[bloodycanuckleheads]

7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You cannot ice a winning team when you start with an empty cupboard

Ummm, Las Vegas is literally doing that right now.  Their cupboard wasn't just figuratively empty - it was actually EMPTY.  They had not a single prospect.  Now, not even one year later, their prospect pool is about as good as our's - and they are a top-5 team.  And, their asset-managment wasn't even that great.

[Rob_Zepp]

Just now, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Ummm, Las Vegas is literally doing that right now.  Their cupboard wasn't just figuratively empty - it was actually EMPTY.  They had not a single prospect.  Now, not even one year later, their prospect pool is about as good as our's - and they are a top-5 team.  And, their asset-managment wasn't even that great.

Yes, and filled wonderfully thanks to the most generous professional roster draft in the history of the NHL.     Yes, what a perfect comparison.   Benning, when he started, was able to go around the NHL and pick roster able players from all other 29 teams and see what he liked.    Yup, that happened.

 

Their (Vegas) prospect pool is not bad but no where near as deep/developed as your Canucks.   It isn't even close.    

 

Vegas has an unsustainable team due to what will be crushing contracts with so many vets and vets who are expiring or similar deals - so they need to work on that "prospect pool" but that is another issue.

 

 

 

  

[bloodycanuckleheads]

13 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Yes, and filled wonderfully thanks to the most generous professional roster draft in the history of the NHL.    

Not so fast.  I was the one who told you guys before the expansion draft that, given the rules, Vegas was going to be considerably better than us this year - and the vast majority of people here said I was crazy, that Vegas was going to be bottom-5.

[Rob_Zepp]

1 minute ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Not so fast.  I was the one who told you guys before the expansion draft that, given the rules, Vegas was going to be considerably better than us this year - and the vast majority of people here said I was crazy, that Vegas was going to be bottom-5.

Well done for being correct but still not sure what that has to do with the Canucks?  Really, get that head treated.   It must be hurting you.

[Rob_Zepp]

Year end grades seem too high for most of the players.    Assuming winning the Stanley Cup is an A+ and finishing dead last is an F.....Canucks overall are in the D range this year and the cumulative score of the players should add up to that.   Thing is, much of their up and coming pieces are like Grade four kids taking Grade 8 courses and naturally they are not "quite there" yet.    Not sure how anyone gets an "A+" on the team.   Boeser had an outstanding rookie season but a solid B sort of thing.    Horvat a C+ and so forth if you must score.

 

Anyway, this is a team sport so no matter how you want to score things, if it is adding up to something more than about a "D", how do you rationalize that against where the team finished?   Remember school, they didn't give you marks relative to your own expectation - you were measured against all the other kids.

[bloodycanuckleheads]

You admit that Vegas has a prospect pool that's nearly as good as our's - but you seemed to miss the fact that they drafted after us and have only had one draft.  Benning, on the other hand, had the better pick and 3 additional drafts.  So, the fact that their prospect-pool is roughly the same quality as our's means that they've done a FAR better job.

 

Quote

Really, get that head treated.   It must be hurting you.

Funny the people on this board with huge numbers of comments are always so quick to attack people personally, when their arguments are proven naive. 

[-AJ-]

I love this stuff. Thanks for makin' a thread on it.

 

Worth noting, for me these are based of expectations, not some sort of grade relative to the average NHL team/player. We were obviously a bad team, but we were also expected to be bad, so there will be some inflation of grades as a result of that. A B- is about meeting expectations for me, so less than that would be falling short of expectations and above that would be exceeding them. That said, there is a small aspect of my grades that is simply due to how good the player is, so guys like Horvat and Boeser naturally get higher grades because they are better.

 

Forwards

Brock Boeser: A+

- I expected a strong season and he went even above my high expectations. A+ for sure.

 

Bo Horvat: A

- Strong season for Bo, but didn't exhibit the growth he showed as much at the beginning of the season. Did show a dramatic improvement in goal-scoring though.

 

Daniel Sedin: A-

- He was slow to start, but picked it up mid-season and went on fire for about 10 games near the end of the year. Had a significantly better year than last season.

 

Brendan Leipsic: A-

- Leipsic gets an A- largely because I expected fairly little from him and he blew it out of the water. We'll see if he can keep it up for next year.

 

Jussi Jokinen: A-

- Like Leipsic, he blew my expectations way out of the water. 10 points in 14 games is very good.

 

Brandon Sutter: B+

- Very good defensive player and managed to maintain his offensive production, despite his new ultra-defensive role. Probably quite underrated.

 

Derrick Dorsett: A-

- Outstanding start to his season and was playing the best hockey of his career before injuries hit and ended his career. 

 

Henrik Sedin: B

- Scored just three goals, but managed an impressive 47 assists, leading the team. Exactly matched last year's point production, which was better than I expected.

 

Adam Gaudette: N/A

- Only played five games; not enough to accurately evaluate.

 

Jake Virtanen: B

- Looked exciting to start, but then seemed to slow down for a bit. In the last two months or so, he really picked up his game and got fans excited for what's to come. Had slightly better offense than his rookie year, but was way more involved on the ice and did more of the little things right.

 

Nikolay Goldobin: C+

- Showed flashes early on, but was horribly inconsistent. Had a strong finish to the season, which hopefully indicates good things for next year.

 

Sven Baertschi: B

- Had a very strong start to the season on the Triple B line, but cooled off once that line ran into injury problems. Baertschi's pace was a career-best, but his improvement is slower than I'd hoped. He looks like he's probably a solid 2nd line guy unless he could maintain the scoring rate he started with at the beginning of the year.

 

Darren Archibald: B-

- Didn't expect him on the team at all, so he gets a boost for that alone. Had a really strong start, but did fade off after about 15 games. If he can keep his fire going strong for an entire year, he could be a perfect 4th line guy.

 

Reid Boucher: C-

- Didn't do much of anything in the NHL. Career AHL player in my mind. Great season in Utica, but that's not rated here.

 

Brendan Gaunce: B-

- Exceptional defensive player and started to get a spark of offense this year. He still needs to continue to develop his game so he becomes less one-dimensional, but he improved this year for sure.

 

Sam Gagner: C

- Probably a bit overly crucified by fans, but still wasn't the greatest. He would have strong spurts before then dying out for another 10 games. Needs to be more consistent and hard working to earn his minutes.

 

Loui Eriksson: B-

- Had a very underrated offensive year. Was producing at a borderline second-line rate while maintaining his solid defense. A good comeback season, but I think we'd all still like to see even more from Loui.

 

Nic Dowd: D

- Was one of the more unnoticeable players on the ice. Didn't create a ton of scoring chances and had little impact on the game.

 

Tyler Motte: C

- Had his moments, but was generally pretty underwhelming. He needs to work hard if he wants an NHL job next year.

 

Markus Granlund: C-

- Granlund remains a solid defensive player, but his offensive production fell off the face of the Earth. If he doesn't step up his game next year, he's in danger of losing his job.

 

Alex Burmistrov: D

- Didn't expect a ton, but also didn't expect him to retire. He'll just be one of those trivia-question guys, like Martin Rucinsky or Eric Weinrich.

 

Thomas Vanek: A

Vanek far exceeded my expectations while he was here. Sad to see him go, but unless he was re-signing, it was the right decision.

 

Michael Chaput: N/A

- Only played nine games; not enough to accurately evaluate.

 

Defensemen

Alex Edler: A-

- I expected Eddie to do alright, but did not expect such a renaissance year for him. Fantastic return to offensive form for him.

 

Chris Tanev: A-

- Very good season for Tanev, but even more oft-injured than usual. He continues to be a stable player on the back end.

 

Alex Biega: B

 - In his usual limited games, Biega set career highs in points while continuing to fill his role admirably.

 

Troy Stecher: C+

- Had a decent defensive year, but a very weak offensive year. He continues to work hard, so the results will come.

 

Ashton Sautner: N/A

- Only played five games; not enough to accurately evaluate.

 

Micheal Del Zotto: C+

- He scores goals and gets some points, as I predicted, but isn't overly reliable on defense. Nothing particularly special.

 

Derrick Pouliot: C+

- Pouliot became arguably our second-best offensive defenseman after Edler, but his defense is arguably the worst of our entire d-corps.

 

Ben Hutton: C- 

- Definitely the worst year of his career. I do think his underlying numbers are too easily dismissed, but 6 assists in 61 games is dreadful compared to last year.

 

Erik Gudbranson: C

- Fills the role of an intimidating big guy and also provides a charismatic presence in the room, but has little beyond that. Almost no offense at all and only mediocre defense doesn't cut it. Hopefully his defense improves next year.

 

Goaltenders

Jacob Markstrom: B

- Marky had a strong start to the season and then faltered quite a bit. However, he finished with a very strong month of March, so his numbers are actually better than last year (save percentage anyways).

 

Anders Nilsson C- 

- Nilsson was epitome of inconsistency. He had a stellar start before going in the eternal inconsistency world. Would have an incredible game followed by three poor ones. Ended up with pretty poor numbers when I expected him to challenge Marky for the starting role and the beginning of the year.

[canucklehead44]

A - Boeser (Only player who deserves an A. Leading scorer, calder candidate, all-star MVP)
B - Horvat (Our Second best player, progressed slightly, untimely injury), Dorsett (awesome before injury - felt the team wasn't the same)
C+ - Edler, Sutter, Leipsic, Jokinen, Vanek (these players all did well in their roles or better than anticipated, bounce back year for Edler. This group you can consider "the bright spots")
C - D. Sedin, Archibald, Biega, Tanev (this is the "not bad" pile. Archibald and Biega both cheap, older, career AHL players who are earning a spot in the NHL. Danny had a nice season to end his career. Tanev was solid in the games he played but too many injuries, really missed him as our top dman this season). 
C - - Virtanen, Baertschi, H.Sedin, Pouliot, Baertschi, Del Zotto, Markstrom (not bad, but not difference makers or didn't meet expectations/salary, very inconsistent, injuries, didn't progress quite to where we need them to be etc. Huge mix in this group. Contenders typically don't have too many of these guys floating around.)
D - Gagner, Goldobin, Stecher, Gaunce, Granlund (were either meh, inconsistent, slightly disappointing or underperforming)

F - Motte, Gudbranson, Eriksson, Dowd, Boucher, Burmistrov, Hutton, Nilsson (Either off the roster next season, fighting for a spot, or earning more than they should. Probably better off if this whole group is moved, waste of roster/cap space).

These ratings make look harsh but this team was bad despite spending near to the cap. 

TEAM SCORE
- Overall standings C-
- Goals for C-
- Goals against C-
- PP B-
- PK C
 

My rankings might seem harsh but given how this team was in the bottom 20% it is a given we would have more players C and below than above a C. Also have to consider this team spent to the cap and was still terrible, meaning on a whole our players were far overpaid for their performance. 

For example, a C- might seem rough for Markstrom, but he ranked 32/60 goalies for save percentage. He is slightly below average but given he is a starter earning 3.7 million he would have needed to be ranked in the 15-20 range to get a C+ ranking. Markstrom is a 1B goalie, who was fine in that role last season with Miller being our 1A. Goaltending was at least average last year, this year it was definitely a weak spot.  

[kloubek]

3 hours ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Not so fast.  I was the one who told you guys before the expansion draft that, given the rules, Vegas was going to be considerably better than us this year - and the vast majority of people here said I was crazy, that Vegas was going to be bottom-5.

I would have been one of them had I seen the post, quite honestly.  Not many people - including the experts - felt that they had the star power to do what they are doing. I will be first to admit I had NO IDEA this would occur, even though I did feel they had at least close to a playoff team.  Fact is, many of the players are overachieving given their previous years.  Not sure how, but it works. 

But as Zepp mentioned, the guys brought in were largely fillers and attempts at making something out of nothing.  We gave up very little for those guys, and even then Benning got bagged on for giving up too many picks.  The guy can't win.

Las Vegas having no picks is technically untrue.  They had their pick of MANY players who had already been drafted.  It's not even relevant, considering they aren't a rebuilding team... they are a new team. Not really sure what your point is there - saying this supports nothing.

I'm not going to sit here and say Benning hasn't made mistakes.  He has, but all GMs do. We now have a full cupboard of prospects and we really didn't have many quality picks to do so.  He made some very savvy player decisions, and here we are.

It's all good man.  It's pretty clear people can't give you facts and make them matter to you. It is what it is. Just enjoy the work he has done all this time in about a year or two and then think to yourself (and you will)... man... he actually did do a pretty good job, didn't he?

[189lb enforcers?]

Ya, OP.

Pretty much the same.

 

 

[48MPHSlapShot]

Boeser- A

Horvat- B+

Bear Cheese- B

Edler- B

D Sedin- B-

H Sedin- C+

Tanev- C

Stetcher- C+

Virtanen- C+

Goldobin- C+

Leipsic- B

Vanek- B

Jolkinen- B+

Hutton- F

Gudbranson- D+

Eriksson- D+

Gagne- D+

MDZ- C-

Pouliot- C

Archibald- C+

Motte- C

Gaunce- C

Dowd- C

Granlund- D+

Burmistrov- F

Boucher- D

Gaudette- C

Sautner- C+

Biega- C

Dorsett- B

Markstrom- C

Nilsson- D

Sutter- C+

 

That's all I got...

 

[Baggins]

21 hours ago, wildcam said:

Sorry your grades are off..lol..lol lol lol

D.Sedin A- 56 pts --- H.Sedin Ct 53 pts ??? Both players are the same, Danny would never score 23 goals without brother,  Henerk is the set up guy...

NO A on this team? 

Boser Bt 

Bo  Bt

Sedins Ct

Liepsic C t -- No A  lol lol

Your very generous  on grades.. We had lots of Ct players, C and some just get a big-----P

I don't think the grades are comparing to league wide talent or rating them from star to reject. Simply grading on what was expected of each player going into the season.

[RJ Fletcher]

20 hours ago, JoesRooster said:

Stecher did not take a step back dude.

Yeah he was great. Made Green feel silly for playing him 13 minutes a night at the start of the season. 

[dpn1]

I think a lot of the grades are a bit high for a team that finished so low in the standings.