48MPHSlapShot Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 (edited) . Edited January 19, 2019 by 48MPHSlapShot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 18 hours ago, janisahockeynut said: 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! OJ will be in the top 4 for the Canucks by the time they are a REAL contender again. Feel free to quote this and ram it back at me but I reserve the right to be perhaps one of a very few who has touted this special player from even before he was drafted. He is so severely underrated on CDC. As far as where QH plays, I think it depends more on his pairing partner than it does on QH. Some guys can play with someone on their off-hand and some cannot. I see someone like Hutton or Edler doing "ok" with it but someone like DP doing better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 8 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: OJ will be in the top 4 for the Canucks by the time they are a REAL contender again. Feel free to quote this and ram it back at me but I reserve the right to be perhaps one of a very few who has touted this special player from even before he was drafted. He is so severely underrated on CDC. As far as where QH plays, I think it depends more on his pairing partner than it does on QH. Some guys can play with someone on their off-hand and some cannot. I see someone like Hutton or Edler doing "ok" with it but someone like DP doing better. Hey Rob I really appreciate your responding to, if he can play right side well.... It sure does open up possibilities, doesn't it...…... I mean, it automatically allows JB to pick a defenseman for either side, and not worry about it......if that is what he chooses Good hearing from you.....Happy New Year Bud! Always appreciate your comments! PS.I agree with you on Juolevi......so we are probably going to sink or swim on the same raft! 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Is the rumour true that the Canucks wanted to pull Hughes from Michigan early? I heard this, then then never heard anything more about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 53 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said: Is the rumour true that the Canucks wanted to pull Hughes from Michigan early? I heard this, then then never heard anything more about it. Heard the same. But seemed so unlikely. I mean, I get how the Canucks would want him here, but did they really expect Q to just bail on his Michigan teammates mid-season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/17/2019 at 12:21 PM, N7Nucks said: 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. We will only be able to protect 3 D, I understand, and spots will be taken by those with NTCs. That might include Edler and Tanev - if we do not trade either of them. In addition, based on his play, Hutton should be protected. That creates a squeeze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 26 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said: We will only be able to protect 3 D, I understand, and spots will be taken by those with NTCs. That might include Edler and Tanev - if we do not trade either of them. In addition, based on his play, Hutton should be protected. That creates a squeeze. Only players with NMC's have to be protected. We have no d-men that currently would have to be protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawkdrummer Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 and what if (the forgotten one) Tryamkin comes back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 If our team is that strong/deep, losing 1 piece is acceptable. We made out like bandits last ED. So it's 1 lump, not 2. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 16 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said: We will only be able to protect 3 D, I understand, and spots will be taken by those with NTCs. That might include Edler and Tanev - if we do not trade either of them. In addition, based on his play, Hutton should be protected. That creates a squeeze. NMC's only. I doubt we protect Edler over youth and Tanev's likely gone by then. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I think too many people on this board are worried about the "What if's" of the expansion draft that will likely happen in either June 2020 or 2021. You can't build a team on panicking this far out about an event where we will lose one player. Trust that Benning is also aware of this and will have a plan (as he did with Vegas), to limit our exposure. My guess is that Benning will offer something on the draft pick side, in exchange for taking the person that we want them to take. I don't get the impression that Benning holds players back, based on what he may have to deal with in the future, he makes plans and takes steps to limit the impact on the team. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said: I think too many people on this board are worried about the "What if's" of the expansion draft that will likely happen in either June 2020 or 2021. You can't build a team on panicking this far out about an event where we will lose one player. Trust that Benning is also aware of this and will have a plan (as he did with Vegas), to limit our exposure. My guess is that Benning will offer something on the draft pick side, in exchange for taking the person that we want them to take. I don't get the impression that Benning holds players back, based on what he may have to deal with in the future, he makes plans and takes steps to limit the impact on the team. *cough* *cough* Eriksson I can easily see a scenario where we deal Eriksson with his high cap hit yet low salary and kick in a 3rd round pick or something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Just now, RetroCanuck said: *cough* *cough* Eriksson I can easily see a scenario where we deal Eriksson with his high cap hit yet low salary and kick in a 3rd round pick or something. That's what I've been saying as well in other threads. Offer Seattle a 2nd round pick and possibly either another late round pick the following year, or a B level prospect to help fill out their farm team, in exchange for taking Eriksson. He'll be a nice defensive fit for them for a few years, will bring really good defensive habits and some offensive and play making upside. Eats up 6 million in Cap, but at that point will only cost Seattle 3 or 4 million per in actual spend. Fair offer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/17/2019 at 11:51 AM, 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. 6 The first article has a note at the top with correction, rectifying the mistake that was made and pointing to an article in the summer. Second one was in regards to 2020 draft, not 2021 Gaudette was already 21 when he signed his contract - not 19 Baun was 22 when he signed his contract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiftynifty Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Anyone know why QH’s OT points in the NCAA did not count while Madden’s OT goal counted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 11/24/2018 at 5:32 PM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Yeah, it’s weird. Apparently the game is officially scored a tie if teams remains deadlocked and then no one scores during the first OT. Then, they play a 2nd OT at 3v3, with the winner gaining an extra point in the standings. But for some reason, the 3v3 scoring doesn’t count in the individual player stats. Anyway, none of this changes the fact that Hughes had two assists. He just doesn’t get full official credit for the second one. He’s back at it tonight, for game two of the weekender versus Wisconsin. Audio broadcast is here: https://mgoblue.com/watch/?Live=249&type=Archive Video is paid/subscription on BTN (Big Ten Network). Wisconsin currently leading 1-0. Michigan with lots of possession, lots of shot attempts, and nothing to show for it yet. They had 4 chances on the PP, and couldn’t score. Second period just getting underway. 15 minutes ago, Shiftynifty said: Anyone know why QH’s OT points in the NCAA did not count while Madden’s OT goal counted? A quote from @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME from last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 13 hours ago, aGENT said: NMC's only. I doubt we protect Edler over youth and Tanev's likely gone by then. Edler has an NMC, at least now, you think he would re-sign without one? Tanev is healthy and playing well, his trade value may never again be this high, but I think the Canucks are thinking playoffs. February will be the month that determines whether we can make it, I believe - three sets of four games in six nights - most of the month on the road - that situation killed us earlier in the year. If we survive February, we make the playoffs, if the Orcas flounder, time for some player movement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Canucks Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Ray_Cathode said: Edler has an NMC, at least now, you think he would re-sign without one? Tanev is healthy and playing well, his trade value may never again be this high, but I think the Canucks are thinking playoffs. February will be the month that determines whether we can make it, I believe - three sets of four games in six nights - most of the month on the road - that situation killed us earlier in the year. If we survive February, we make the playoffs, if the Orcas flounder, time for some player movement. No, he doesn't. He only has an NTC. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 4 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said: Edler has an NMC, at least now, you think he would re-sign without one? Tanev is healthy and playing well, his trade value may never again be this high, but I think the Canucks are thinking playoffs. February will be the month that determines whether we can make it, I believe - three sets of four games in six nights - most of the month on the road - that situation killed us earlier in the year. If we survive February, we make the playoffs, if the Orcas flounder, time for some player movement. As @The Great Canucks noted, he has an NTC, not a NMC. Whether Tanev is moved or not this deadline, IMO, he's headed back East when he turns UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rocket Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 10 hours ago, Shiftynifty said: Anyone know why QH’s OT points in the NCAA did not count while Madden’s OT goal counted? Madden’s OT goal didn’t count to his point total 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