Glug Datt Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 18 hours ago, Alflives said: Did the Jets trade for Big Buff, or sign him as a UFA? Chara signed with the Bruins as a UFA. We do Hughes coming, so maybe we don’t need a top UFA Dman? buff was traded to Atlanta from Chicago... what a beast.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glug Datt Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) 18 hours ago, canuckledraggin said: I think Tryamkin is that guy. When he sees what this team has become he is going to want to come back here. He didn't want to suffer through the losing years, but I don't hold it against him. If he comes back to this team in a couple years, he is going to be a game changer for this team. They will need the type of physical play he brings to replace a worse version of himself in Gudbranson. not sure about the comment on his motivation, but yes, tram is that man Edited January 16, 2019 by Glug Datt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 18 hours ago, Alflives said: Did the Jets trade for Big Buff, or sign him as a UFA? Chara signed with the Bruins as a UFA. We do Hughes coming, so maybe we don’t need a top UFA Dman? If Hughes turns out as a puck moving, zone escaping, point generating star, then it would sure be nice to have solid 2’s again, like in the days when we had Ehrhoff, Edler, Salo, Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Tanev. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said: If Hughes turns out as a puck moving, zone escaping, point generating star, then it would sure be nice to have solid 2’s again, like in the days when we had Ehrhoff, Edler, Salo, Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Tanev. Absolutely JB is going to need to build a very solid supporting group for our young core. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 32 minutes ago, Alflives said: Absolutely JB is going to need to build a very solid supporting group for our young core. And he has a pretty good start with that. Whether you like them or not Hutton, Stecher and Guddy are NHL defensemen that are young enough to fit into a contending team 3ish years down the line. Add in are 3 high end D prospects who look very likely to be NhL defensemen and we have a complete top 6 in a couple years. Hughes-Stecher Juolevi-Guddy Hutton-Woo Add in a few extra D that have potential to earn spots such as Rathbone, Brisebois, Chatfield, Eliot, Brassard, Tryamkin and we have a lot of potential NHL D. Hopefully we are able to draft another top RD prospect or two in next draft such as Seider and Hugo Has to replace big lumbering Guddy but I feel somewhat comfortable going forward with the top 6 above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stierlitz Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Father Ryan Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 4 hours ago, RetroCanuck said: And he has a pretty good start with that. Whether you like them or not Hutton, Stecher and Guddy are NHL defensemen that are young enough to fit into a contending team 3ish years down the line. Add in are 3 high end D prospects who look very likely to be NhL defensemen and we have a complete top 6 in a couple years. Hughes-Stecher Juolevi-Guddy Hutton-Woo Add in a few extra D that have potential to earn spots such as Rathbone, Brisebois, Chatfield, Eliot, Brassard, Tryamkin and we have a lot of potential NHL D. Hopefully we are able to draft another top RD prospect or two in next draft such as Seider and Hugo Has to replace big lumbering Guddy but I feel somewhat comfortable going forward with the top 6 above. Seider would be a good add. Sounds like Guddy, but a better skater and a little more aware of getting the puck out...without turn overs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 On 1/15/2019 at 11:22 AM, Boudrias said: I think @drummerboyis simply adding a little cautionary caveat to the conversation. By equating him with Jordan Subban. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Important news on the Quinn Hughes front. Not sure by the information but Ryan Biech is often the stats/information CBA guy so take it for what its worth, looks like Quinn could be saved from expansion draft. I highly see the chance that the Canucks management will enforce this on coaching staff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 7 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: Important news on the Quinn Hughes front. Not sure by the information but Ryan Biech is often the stats/information CBA guy so take it for what its worth, looks like Quinn could be saved from expansion draft. I highly see the chance that the Canucks management will enforce this on coaching staff. I think it was @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME who explained that because QH turns 20 in 2019, any one pro game counts as a year played and thus he would have to be protected. All too much for my little brain. Both SID and Biech are very reliable sources ! ( I may have this all bass ackwards ! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 29 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: Important news on the Quinn Hughes front. Not sure by the information but Ryan Biech is often the stats/information CBA guy so take it for what its worth, looks like Quinn could be saved from expansion draft. I highly see the chance that the Canucks management will enforce this on coaching staff. Hughes would always have been saved from the expansion draft, it was just a matter of potentially losing Stecher or Hutton or some one like that. Hopefully it is 11 games or fewer to be exempt. Seems like an odd number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 26 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: Hughes would always have been saved from the expansion draft, it was just a matter of potentially losing Stecher or Hutton or some one like that. Hopefully it is 11 games or fewer to be exempt. Seems like an odd number. ...it's 10 games or under...but I am not sure it would apply to Quinn/college kids.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 17, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, SingleThorn said: I think it was @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME who explained that because QH turns 20 in 2019, any one pro game counts as a year played and thus he would have to be protected. All too much for my little brain. Both SID and Biech are very reliable sources ! ( I may have this all bass ackwards ! ) Biech has said basically the same thing as me, regarding Hughes and expansion, in several previous articles: https://theathletic.com/702802/2018/12/10/projecting-who-the-canucks-will-protect-in-the-seattle-expansion-draft-version-1-0/ https://theathletic.com/639815/2018/11/09/taking-measure-of-how-the-canucks-might-approach-the-expansion-draft/ https://canucksarmy.com/2018/03/27/gaudette-dahlen-and-the-expansion-draft/ Basically, a professional year is 10 or more NHL games when you’re talking about 18 and 19 year olds. But for age 20 and over, a professional year is a single game or more played in a pro league while under contract for that season. Hughes, if signed to a 2018-19 SPC (ELC) in 2019, will be considered “age 20” because he turns 20 in calendar 2019. Age here is determined using rules that are similar to those used to determine slide eligibility. Since Hughes will turn 20 before the end of calendar 2019, he would be deemed “age 20” for any contract signed in 2019. And so he’d be an “age 20 or older player,” when it comes to expansion and professional years, should he sign and play at the end of the 2018-19 season (even though he’d only be 19 years old at the time). Should Hughes appear in a single pro game this seaon, while under contract, then 2018-19 will be considered his first professional year. This is why Biech has Hughes on the protected list for his mock expansion draft. Assuming he signs at the end of this season, and gets a few games played in Vancouver, then he’ll be expansion draft eligible and need to be protected. We know from the last expansion draft when players like Kyle Baun (and age 20 or over player) were eligible for the draft. Baun burned his first professional year from playing only 3 games for Chicago at the end of 2014-15, after leaving college to go pro. 3 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 9 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Hughes, if signed to a 2018-19 SPC (ELC) in 2019, will be considered “age 20” because he turns 20 in calendar 2019. Thanks @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME ........much appreciated ! The quote from SN 650 appears to show Biech referring to QH ( if he signs ) playing less than 11 games to keep his exemption from the ED. That's the part I'm finding a tad confusing. Your breakdown of the exemption rules seems to leave no doubt that one game would trigger the need for QH to be protected (......and makes totally logical sense ! ) 11 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: But for age 20 and over, a professional year is a single game or more played in a pro league while under contract for that season 1 hour ago, N7Nucks said: 2 hours ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: Important news on the Quinn Hughes front. Not sure by the information but Ryan Biech is often the stats/information CBA guy so take it for what its worth, looks like Quinn could be saved from expansion draft. I highly see the chance that the Canucks management will enforce this on coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 23 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Biech has said basically the same thing as me, regarding Hughes and expansion, in several previous articles: https://theathletic.com/702802/2018/12/10/projecting-who-the-canucks-will-protect-in-the-seattle-expansion-draft-version-1-0/ https://theathletic.com/639815/2018/11/09/taking-measure-of-how-the-canucks-might-approach-the-expansion-draft/ https://canucksarmy.com/2018/03/27/gaudette-dahlen-and-the-expansion-draft/ Basically, a professional year is 10 or more NHL games when you’re talking about 18 and 19 year olds. But for age 20 and over, a professional year is a single game or more played in a pro league while under contract for that season. Hughes, if signed to a 2018-19 SPC (ELC) in 2019, will be considered “age 20” because he turns 20 in calendar 2019. Age here is determined using rules that are similar to those used to determine slide eligibility. Since Hughes will turn 20 before the end of calendar 2019, he would be deemed “age 20” for any contract signed in 2019. And so he’d be an “age 20 or older player,” when it comes to expansion and professional years, should he sign and play at the end of the 2018-19 season (even though he’d only be 19 years old at the time). Should Hughes appear in a single pro game this seaon, while under contract, then 2018-19 will be considered his first professional year. This is why Biech has Hughes on the protected list for his mock expansion draft. Assuming he signs at the end of this season, and gets a few games played in Vancouver, then he’ll be expansion draft eligible and need to be protected. We know from the last expansion draft when players like Kyle Baun (and age 20 or over player) were eligible for the draft. Baun burned his first professional year from playing only 3 games for Chicago at the end of 2014-15, after leaving college to go pro. ATO with Utica for their playoff push and run would be ideal, but will never happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Just now, SingleThorn said: Thanks @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME ........much appreciated ! The quote from SN 650 appears to show Biech referring to QH ( if he signs ) playing less than 11 games to keep his exemption from the ED. That's the part I'm finding a tad confusing. Your breakdown of the exemption rules seems to leave no doubt that one game would trigger the need for QH to be protected (......and makes totally logical sense ! ) Yeah, that 11 games makes no sense to me, unless the guy from SN650 typing the tweet pressed one twice by accident. It would also be a significant departure from everything Biech has said previously. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Well, if we are being honest. Even if he needs to be protected we aren't really at risk of losing a big time d-man. Would be nice to protect an extra 5/6 D-man but if not, oh well we'll make do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, stawns said: ATO with Utica for their playoff push and run would be ideal, but will never happen. Utica ATO for Hughes and a trade and re-sign of Edler. Oh to have all the cakes and eat them too 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 So just asking...….we know Hughes can play both LD and RD...…..on a scale of 1 to 10 What would you rank him playing LD and what would you rank him playing RD Anyone have a valued opinion on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 (edited) Really curious if a Edler....Hughes a real 1/2 Hutton....Tanev a pretty decent 3/4 Top 4 would work? LHD Juolevi/Pouliot/Briseboise……………...Gudbranson/Stecher/Biega…….. for 5/6/7? Or a lot easier and cheaper getting a 5/6 Dman out of UFA....if needed It sure would help our re-building process, if it worked well....especially if we could use the extra money on a LWer (Panarin, Stone etc....) You know there is just so many possibilities! Edited January 19, 2019 by janisahockeynut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now