[Proposal] Balanced Scoring & Sandpaper!

[Hindustan Smyl]

18 minutes ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

Edler is having a much better season because of the increased rolls of everyone else.  The team was asking too much of him. And tanev is a rock back there as usual.

 

Players like Edler and Tanev are invaluable. We will never get what they are worth in a trade. So I think it's best to keep them to groom juolevi, Hughes, woo, etc.

Agreed 1,000%

[theo5789]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

*NTC not NMC FWIW.

 

 

IMO, management has a plan in place to build towards a legit contender in a couple years. If that means some short term pain for solid pieces, I don't think they'd hesitate.

 

That said, Edler would still need to waive and I'd have zero hesitation with re-signing him for +/- 2 years, trade or no trade.

 

Tanev has another year, so unless the return is worth while, you simply hang on to him. Sutter is in a similar situation (more term).

 

I could also easily see Hughes playing right side should we move Tanev and/or we could look at filing a right D spot with Karlsson, Myers etc.

 

Next year I'd be just fine starting with something like:

 

Edler, Myers/Karlsson

Hughes, Tanev

Hutton, Gudbranson

 

Brisebois, Stecher

 

At the TDL you move Tanev and recall OJ (shifting Hughes to right side).

 

 

Karlsson would be a no brainer if he's willing to sign here (which I think is the biggest problem here), although his cap hit could be a problem down the road unless he performs at a top level through the duration of the contract.

 

Myers I feel is a bit overrated. He's currently not being relied very heavily by the team like he was last year, but last year they've have more injury issues which gave him more time. With a more healthy lineup, it looks like Myers is their #4 dman. So the question is how much is he going to be asking for if he hits UFA? Current cap hit is 5.5 million, so he's probably looking for a raise, plus a bump if he tests UFA. Is he worth 7-7.5 million a season at likely max term? He's not the biggest point producer (on pace for 23 points this season) and he's not their go-to PK guy, but does get a fair share of time there. Would he fare well in a top pairing role here? The highest I've seen people willing to offer Edler is 6.5 million a year (for not much term either) and he's leading the league in shot blocks per game while playing top minutes in all game situations and generally against the top competition (de facto number 1).

 

I'm still leaning more towards going after Bobrovsky, but it depends on how much he would want (I would hope he could get locked in the 9-10 million a season mark). Considering right now that our top 2 dmen prospects in Hughes and Juolevi are more known for their offense than their defensive work currently, having a solid backstop could help mitigate some errors which are bound to happen even if paired with solid defensive partners. Demko should be the goalie of the future, but we don't know how he will fare at the NHL level, so I think it's better to lock up a sure thing in this position and hope the pieces fall into place on defense (maybe Hughes will be Karlsson-like anyway and Tryamkin returns to provide what Myers could) rather than needing to fall back on Markstrom if Demko doesn't quite pan out to what we were hoping for (I like Markstrom, but he simply isn't in the upper echelon).

[mll]

.

[gameburn]

10 hours ago, hammertime said:

Levio Pete Boeser Are great with o zone possesion.

Goldy Bo Virtanen are great puck rushers will be key at gaining the blueline

Baertschi Sutter Loui 200ft utility line 

Roussel Beagle Archi  Energy

Extra fwds Granlund Motte

 

Realistically though all this group will do is put up a valiant struggle while a legit playoff team cruises over us on their way to round 2

If they make the playoffs and Pettersson plays to his strengths, they will win games.  Not enough, I know.  The D isn't good enough yet, and I wonder about our goaltending sometimes.  But this forward group could be enough with the right support.

[gameburn]

7 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Long term projection and development for them to achieve their full potential is what makes Juolevi and Woo look better than Brisebois. Brisebois is much more likely to help us out next season and even that is a bit of a long shot at this point. Whatever the case, none of these players are going to replace what Edler and Tanev provide this year or even next year, so the idea of moving them and having them replaced by these prospects having them "on paper" take over could be a step back in our rebuild. Hughes looks good and certainly provides something different that our defense doesn't have, but he will also be a rookie and will make mistakes, so it is ideal to have guys like Edler and Tanev helping shelter him until he gets those kinks out of his game which likely will take more than a year or two. Also, Tryamkin won't be here for at least one more season as well.

 

We had a deal in place for Hamhuis and Dallas pulled the rug under us changing their offer and trying to lowball us. Benning didn't just move him out of desperation and demonstrated that he wants fair value or we will not send you a player that will help you on a playoff run. We reaped the rewards the following offseason because of this. So I don't see a concern over a Hamhuis type situation. Tanev is signed for another season and Edler seems to have full interest in re-signing back here unless he's no longer wanted here (which I can't see the Canucks feeling that way) and he's open to even being traded if management lets him know we don't see a future with him.

 

If we are looking at free agency and we are willing to pay, then Ferland would be an option that could actually play top 6 minutes. Not a heavyweight, but will add some protection and can actually be on the ice with your top players. We could sign a low minute dman, but I feel like it would be a waste of a spot in a position that you likely want players that can legitimately play in case we run into injury problems or something in a game.

1. Ferland is appealing, I agree. 

 

2. I hope we can wait an extra year to move one of Edler or Tanev -- who wants to lose either of them unnecessarily?

 

3. Your argument has spurred me to think that rather surprisingly we are no longer in a rebuild, not exactly anyway.  So you are right: picks are not the be all and end all anymore.  And any notion of tanking is also out of place now.  Nevertheless, moving some vets sooner rather than later seems pretty wise.  Not easy to decide the timing on this.  But I think we can all agree that Edler, Tanev, even Sutter are not going to be permitted to retire in place here.  They aren't the Sedins.  But maybe not this TDL, you are probably going to proven correct on this.

[70seven]

I too like the idea of Ferland.  Especially now that he’s a team removed from the flames, he’d be a pain in their arses 100%. 

 

And speaking of the flames...  that’s going to be a really good rivrary for us over the next 5 years. 

[Ballisticsports.]

16 hours ago, Alflives said:

A contending team might just pay a young (potential) star D man, or a young (potentially) tough winger for Sutter, Tanev, or both (if packaged together.  The rest on your list are worth nothing (IMO) except Edler, who I think we should keep.  

Derrick Pouliot  is still young and was considered this being a high draft pick and offensive defenceman in Jr (still considered "offensive" at the nhl level at this moment unfortunately)

But would you have been happy getting Pouliot for Sutter and Tanev?

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

Derrick Pouliot  is still young and was considered this being a high draft pick and offensive defenceman in Jr (still considered "offensive" at the nhl level at this moment unfortunately)

But would you have been happy getting Pouliot for Sutter and Tanev?

At the moment, no.  However, there are several young D we would excited about getting now, don’t you think?  

[Ballisticsports.]

26 minutes ago, Alflives said:

At the moment, no.  However, there are several young D we would excited about getting now, don’t you think?  

I am sure there are, but prospects for proven can be pretty risky too, if the proven player is redundant on the team, then maybe the risk

Anyone in mind you had of thinking someone may be interested in giving up a young offensive prospect for Sutter and Tanev?

[theo5789]

4 hours ago, gameburn said:

1. Ferland is appealing, I agree. 

 

2. I hope we can wait an extra year to move one of Edler or Tanev -- who wants to lose either of them unnecessarily?

 

3. Your argument has spurred me to think that rather surprisingly we are no longer in a rebuild, not exactly anyway.  So you are right: picks are not the be all and end all anymore.  And any notion of tanking is also out of place now.  Nevertheless, moving some vets sooner rather than later seems pretty wise.  Not easy to decide the timing on this.  But I think we can all agree that Edler, Tanev, even Sutter are not going to be permitted to retire in place here.  They aren't the Sedins.  But maybe not this TDL, you are probably going to proven correct on this.

Only concern with Ferland is how much he will demand as a UFA. We have seen time and again where UFAs ask for a lot with many teams vying for their services and they end up not being worth their contract. We don't want to end up in a situation where we are stuck with a big cap problem. I'm sure Lucic or Ladd at one point would've looked like a decent option in our top 6 as well with their grit and they didn't quite pan out. What Ferland has going for him is that he can skate and has demonstrated some skill to fit the top 6, but he's suffered a concussion recently which he returned for one game and then was out again with an upper body injury (don't know if it's related to the concussion on not), but did return again recently.

 

Well Edler would require to be re-signed and I don't think it'll be for one year. So Tanev is most realistically going to be traded next year especially with only a modified NTC, but hopefully we have the RD to replace what he provides defensively. But I certainly would rather lose them for nothing but gain their max help in developing our players than moving them early for a return that doesn't help us now. It would have to be a very enticing return for me to consider it.

 

I don't think we are necessarily done rebuilding, but I feel like the need to "tank" is unnecessary at this point. If we can gain more draft picks so we can sustain a longer duration of strength, then that's good too, but we have to be careful who we move and when to achieve this. I think we can start moving vets earlier than full developmental capacity when we have the prospects able to take over and creating depth, but with that said I don't want to just dump players who have helped us take our team to the next level because there team aspects to this that could take a turn for the worse as well. These are things that we as fans are unlikely to see and know until after the fact, so I'll trust management to make the right decisions on when it is time. I wouldn't be surprised if Edler retires as a Canuck, but I agree that Tanev (could possibly get a very good return to justify moving him earlier than necessary) and Sutter (Gaudette may hopefully be ready to take over in a couple of years) may be moved at some point.

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

I am sure there are, but prospects for proven can be pretty risky too, if the proven player is redundant on the team, then maybe the risk

Anyone in mind you had of thinking someone may be interested in giving up a young offensive prospect for Sutter and Tanev?

Nope.  A reporter from Philadelphia said they old love Sutter.  Sutter would take. Lot of the D responsiblity from Couturier.  He mentioned Ghost as a potential return.  

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, 70seven said:

I too like the idea of Ferland.  Especially now that he’s a team removed from the flames, he’d be a pain in their arses 100%. 

 

And speaking of the flames...  that’s going to be a really good rivrary for us over the next 5 years. 

Yes and yes. If you can’t beat them, join them (Ferland)...he’s turned it a the type of player every team wants. 

 

Been looking forward to a Flames Vancouver rivalry since the one we had with them in the late eighties to mid nineties simmered down.  Torts did his best to re-ignite it, but it fizzled off.  The best rivalries are always with two top teams going hammer and tong against each other in the same division or conference (divisions are the best though).  PIT-PHI, MTL-NDQ, EDM-CAL, MTL-BO, NYI-NYR, DET-COL, VAN-COL, VAN-CAL (most of these also have simmered down)..

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Yes and yes. If you can’t beat them, join them (Ferland)...he’s turned it a the type of player every team wants. 

 

Been looking forward to a Flames Vancouver rivalry since the one we had with them in the late eighties to mid nineties simmered down.  Torts did his best to re-ignite it, but it fizzled off.  The best rivalries are always with two top teams going hammer and tong against each other in the same division or conference (divisions are the best though).  PIT-PHI, MTL-NDQ, EDM-CAL, MTL-BO, NYI-NYR, DET-COL, VAN-COL, VAN-CAL (most of these also have simmered down)..

I would like Ferland here too, but wouldn’t he more likely be signed by a top contender?  I could see the Loser Leafs going after Ferland.  

[IBatch]

21 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I would like Ferland here too, but wouldn’t he more likely be signed by a top contender?  I could see the Loser Leafs going after Ferland.  

Probably..I’d like Stone this summer if we could nab him...and Parayko if possible out of STL.  Otherwise just draft and develop for two more years and during that span start filling holes, even if that means trading some of our pool away or roster players.  The Oilers could have had a better defense and Hall on their team still if they played their cards differently, at some point Benning has to put his trading hat on and making some moves to tweak.  All for signing TRADABLE UFAs too, worked with Vanek, that sort of thing too.  Sutter might be the wisest move this year, now that we have Beagle it would add a second for sure, maybe more and not really make a huge difference when it comes time to compete, Gaudette has shown enough for me to be comfortable with that trade.   Good things are coming to Vancouver soon, Hughes will make an immidiate impact on our PP and depth, re-signing Edler or trading him (I know he had to agree so small chance of it) both have merits too.  OJ will eventually arrive, even a late bloomer and better than nothing, yet to be determined how that will play out.  

 

Our division looks to be a tough one, trial by fire will only make our team stronger though, it’s great to see that quite a few teams are rebuilding or just getting started with their rebuilds at the same time in our division. LA, SJ, ANA are clinging on with their last cores last harrahs, EDM, CAL, VAN, Vegas and even ARI (who won’t be here long though) are the up and comers, maybe even Seattle if they can duplicate Vegas success but unlikely.  It feels a little like the old Smythe division again..

[komodo0921]

One player I can appreciate every time I see him is Cedric Paquette.

Not going to give you much offence but he brings hard work in all three zones and some pretty gritty sandpaper.

Maybe he could be part of a deal involving Edler.

[aGENT]

12 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Karlsson would be a no brainer if he's willing to sign here (which I think is the biggest problem here), although his cap hit could be a problem down the road unless he performs at a top level through the duration of the contract.

 

Myers I feel is a bit overrated. He's currently not being relied very heavily by the team like he was last year, but last year they've have more injury issues which gave him more time. With a more healthy lineup, it looks like Myers is their #4 dman. So the question is how much is he going to be asking for if he hits UFA? Current cap hit is 5.5 million, so he's probably looking for a raise, plus a bump if he tests UFA. Is he worth 7-7.5 million a season at likely max term? He's not the biggest point producer (on pace for 23 points this season) and he's not their go-to PK guy, but does get a fair share of time there. Would he fare well in a top pairing role here? The highest I've seen people willing to offer Edler is 6.5 million a year (for not much term either) and he's leading the league in shot blocks per game while playing top minutes in all game situations and generally against the top competition (de facto number 1).

 

I'm still leaning more towards going after Bobrovsky, but it depends on how much he would want (I would hope he could get locked in the 9-10 million a season mark). Considering right now that our top 2 dmen prospects in Hughes and Juolevi are more known for their offense than their defensive work currently, having a solid backstop could help mitigate some errors which are bound to happen even if paired with solid defensive partners. Demko should be the goalie of the future, but we don't know how he will fare at the NHL level, so I think it's better to lock up a sure thing in this position and hope the pieces fall into place on defense (maybe Hughes will be Karlsson-like anyway and Tryamkin returns to provide what Myers could) rather than needing to fall back on Markstrom if Demko doesn't quite pan out to what we were hoping for (I like Markstrom, but he simply isn't in the upper echelon).

I doubt we go after Bobrovsky. Markstrom has been playing well enough to hold the fort until Demko arrives. Should Demko (and DiPietro) not develop as hoped, we can always shop/trade for a goalie in a couple years when it matters without clogging up the position with a high priced, multi year deal to a not young Bob that would be blocking Demko.

 

Myers I'd say is rated pretty much where he should be. He'd be a suitable replacement for Tanev, with more size. I doubt he gets 7-7.5 either. More likely 6.5 +/- IMO.

[IBatch]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

I doubt we go after Bobrovsky. Markstrom has been playing well enough to hold the fort until Demko arrives. Should Demko (and DiPietro) not develop as hoped, we can always shop/trade for a goalie in a couple years when it matters without clogging up the position with a high priced, multi year deal to a not young Bob that would be blocking Demko.

 

Myers I'd say is rated pretty much where he should be. He'd be a suitable replacement for Tanev, with more size. I doubt he gets 7-7.5 either. More likely 6.5 +/- IMO.

Don’t know if passing up on Bobrovsky if available to us is the best decision, it’s definitely safer to wait and see how Demko and or DiPeitro works out.  Worst case for is we end up like CAL or PHI (esp during their Lindros era) decent to good offense and defense,  but troubles in net.  We could always look to free agency like we did when we signed Miller...hopefully it won’t matter and one or both will succeed in the NHL.  Nice to see the recognition at the WJs, he will get one game for sure and if he does well he will get the starter job, in some ways he’s ahead of Demko in his development, great pick by Benning to shore things up and have a back up plan.  

 

Pretty much agree with your post, I wouldn’t lose sleep if we got Bobrovsky either, arguably one of if not the best goaltender the last three years and given how star goalies do at his age should play well into his mid-late thirties.  If Demko and or DiPeitro work out too we could then trade one or both of them to help other parts of the team or just keep the picks coming..so do see some merit in the idea too.  Markstrom could also be traded to make room for them, Nilsson let go. 

[Ballisticsports.]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Nope.  A reporter from Philadelphia said they old love Sutter.  Sutter would take. Lot of the D responsiblity from Couturier.  He mentioned Ghost as a potential return.  

He has some nice offence numbers for a later pick but he is on for more against, than he is on for

His offensive starts are a lot more than his d zone starts

at 4.5 Cap I dont know? If the above balanced out more then maybe

I would like more offense, but defense have to still play some defence, if you had a strong dependable goalie that may help ease concerns

 

Maybe I give up the ghost?

I am hopeful something may work out

We have Hughes coming  

Priskie lighting it up (6r)

Adam Fox too (3r)

Makar and Hughes neck and neck (1r)

Nice to get the 2 later rounds in a wishful trade thinking bout that is Wash and Calgary property not Philly

 

Is  Brinson Pasichnuk unsigned after not being drafted?

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

I doubt we go after Bobrovsky. Markstrom has been playing well enough to hold the fort until Demko arrives. Should Demko (and DiPietro) not develop as hoped, we can always shop/trade for a goalie in a couple years when it matters without clogging up the position with a high priced, multi year deal to a not young Bob that would be blocking Demko.

 

Myers I'd say is rated pretty much where he should be. He'd be a suitable replacement for Tanev, with more size. I doubt he gets 7-7.5 either. More likely 6.5 +/- IMO.

Demko is still a couple years away before actually taking a starter spot IMO and that's if all goes according to plan in his development. Basically spot duty this year if Nilsson gets traded or if injuries occur (hopefully the concussion hasn't set him back) and then transitioned into a backup next season and if puts up good numbers, then possibly getting a look at the starter spot, but unlikely to be a heavy workload type of guy immediately so we would still need a respectable backup. The contracts of our current goaltenders seem to be aligned for this with possibly Markstrom being extended if Demko needs more time. So ideally this works out and we have a cheaper goaltending duo that allows us to budget more for the rest of the team, but it is a bit of a gamble in a position that is quite critical. There are many teams that have a strong foundation throughout the lineup, but just have shaky goaltending holding them back and it hasn't been easy for them to find a suitable fix. It's not often that a two time Vezina winning goaltender becomes available for free and I think I would even target Bobrovsky over Karlsson.

 

Should Demko pan out, well the last time we were in a situation like this, we got Horvat out of it, so just make a decision and stick with unlike the last time around. DiPietro is 19, so he would very well still be in the mix even if we give Bobrovsky a max term contract of 7 years (considering that I'm projecting Demko to maybe be a starter by age 25 or so). I'm not too concerned about Bobrovsky by age 37 as goalies tend to be able to last longer especially when they are quality ones. Luongo for example is still the undeniable starter for Florida at age 39 and I would say he's only about dropped off to a level where Markstrom is currently.

 

As for Myers, I agree 6.5 is what he should be getting, but that's if he re-signs in Winnipeg. If he hits UFA, there's generally a mark up. I think Myers is a good top 4 dman, but I don't think he makes enough of an impact and unless we do indeed trade Tanev, then I don't see the urgency to make this swap. I don't think Myers is as good as Edler IMO, so it's hard for me to justify having him over the price of what Edler could/should get in his next contract.

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Demko is still a couple years away before actually taking a starter spot IMO and that's if all goes according to plan in his development. Basically spot duty this year if Nilsson gets traded or if injuries occur (hopefully the concussion hasn't set him back) and then transitioned into a backup next season and if puts up good numbers, then possibly getting a look at the starter spot, but unlikely to be a heavy workload type of guy immediately so we would still need a respectable backup. The contracts of our current goaltenders seem to be aligned for this with possibly Markstrom being extended if Demko needs more time. So ideally this works out and we have a cheaper goaltending duo that allows us to budget more for the rest of the team, but it is a bit of a gamble in a position that is quite critical. There are many teams that have a strong foundation throughout the lineup, but just have shaky goaltending holding them back and it hasn't been easy for them to find a suitable fix. It's not often that a two time Vezina winning goaltender becomes available for free and I think I would even target Bobrovsky over Karlsson.

 

Should Demko pan out, well the last time we were in a situation like this, we got Horvat out of it, so just make a decision and stick with unlike the last time around. DiPietro is 19, so he would very well still be in the mix even if we give Bobrovsky a max term contract of 7 years (considering that I'm projecting Demko to maybe be a starter by age 25 or so). I'm not too concerned about Bobrovsky by age 37 as goalies tend to be able to last longer especially when they are quality ones. Luongo for example is still the undeniable starter for Florida at age 39 and I would say he's only about dropped off to a level where Markstrom is currently.

 

As for Myers, I agree 6.5 is what he should be getting, but that's if he re-signs in Winnipeg. If he hits UFA, there's generally a mark up. I think Myers is a good top 4 dman, but I don't think he makes enough of an impact and unless we do indeed trade Tanev, then I don't see the urgency to make this swap. I don't think Myers is as good as Edler IMO, so it's hard for me to justify having him over the price of what Edler could/should get in his next contract.

Agree that's the timeline for the goalies. Still think it's unlikely we target Bob. More likely we target another 'Nilsson' as insurance for Demko not being ready to backup next year.

 

DiPietro looks like he'll hopefully be a solid backup at this level. Happy to have him prove me wrong and be a dominant starter though.

 

I'd have Edler (+/- 2 years) and Myers/Karlsson.

 

Don't see Myers getting more than $6.5 +/- in WPG or otherwise.