Why the Canucks shouldn't make the playoffs (not about draft)

[stawns]

Just now, oldnews said:

I'm not sure it's safe to assume Ferland would produce more elsewhere.

 

His linemates (Aho and Teravainen) have scored 146 pts this year - ie playing with two guys producing at the rate EP is .... Ferland's 36 in 62 lags considerably behind their scoring rate.

 

6 of Ferland's 17 goals are powerplay goals = 11 even strength goals in 62 games with a pair of point per game linemates.

 

I like Ferland a lot - but not at the rumoured types of terms it would apparently take = that's just too much of a premium for grit and hitting.....as was the pricetag of giving up Lindholm - who has 77 points himself... I imagine Calgary jumps at that deal all over again.

 

I look at a player like the Canes' Jordan Martinook - scoring 15 goals....177 hits....50 takeaways....better underlying numbers than Ferland - and more versatile / able to kill penalties - and I'm not looking at him as a top 6 winger, but as a guy that brings comparables on ice - and was signed for a couple million.

 

I think the thing about Ferland - his bargain days - as a bargain to the team who holds his rights - are over.  You might be fortunate to get market value outcomes out of him for the early, or hopefully majority of his contract - but I don't think I'd take the risk.

 

Instead I'd take the challenge of finding your own emerging Ferland comparable - as opposed to buying high on a UFA who has a nice set of qualities he brings - but already cost the Canes an extreme asset premium for what he brings - and is now about to cost a significant term.

 

I think I'd be looking at alternatives personally - or players that bring a slightly different skillset but still add some weight, two way game, and mobility/forecheck to EP's line.

For me, it would depend on term.  High hit, shorter term, I'm in for Ferland.  I also think he'd love to play the Flames 6 times a year 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure it's safe to assume Ferland would produce more elsewhere.

 

His linemates (Aho and Teravainen) have scored 146 pts this year - ie playing with two guys producing at the rate EP is .... Ferland's 36 in 62 lags considerably behind their scoring rate.

 

6 of Ferland's 17 goals are powerplay goals = 11 even strength goals in 62 games with a pair of point per game linemates.

 

I like Ferland a lot - but not at the rumoured types of terms it would apparently take = that's just too much of a premium for grit and hitting.....as was the pricetag of giving up Lindholm - who has 77 points himself... I imagine Calgary jumps at that deal all over again.

 

I look at a player like the Canes' Jordan Martinook - scoring 15 goals....177 hits....50 takeaways....better underlying numbers than Ferland - and more versatile / able to kill penalties - and I'm not looking at him as a top 6 winger, but as a guy that brings comparables on ice - and was signed for a couple million.

 

I think the thing about Ferland - his bargain days - as a bargain to the team who holds his rights - are over.  You might be fortunate to get market value outcomes out of him for the early, or hopefully majority of his contract - but I don't think I'd take the risk.

 

Instead I'd take the challenge of finding your own emerging Ferland comparable - as opposed to buying high on a UFA who has a nice set of qualities he brings - but already cost the Canes an extreme asset premium for what he brings - and is now about to cost a significant term.

 

I think I'd be looking at alternatives personally - or players that bring a slightly different skillset but still add some weight, two way game, and mobility/forecheck to EP's line.

I'd also bet a lot of Ferland's "intangibles" created room for the skilled guys to get there points in.

[ButterBean]

3 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

You can have **** officiating but still have the better team advance.  If Willie D quit rolling his lines fairly equally and give the Sedins additional ice time (they were playing well that season & in that series) we might’ve prevailed in spite of the refs.

Agreed. That was a tough series to lose because the Sedins were playing the best playoff hockey of their careers. Too bad our defense was terrible and giving up a bunch of late game goals.

[oldnews]

27 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd also bet a lot of Ferland's "intangibles" created room for the skilled guys to get there points in.

No doubt.  And a willing combatant when necessary.

 

But I''m going to spin an alternative for a minute - not a proposal, but a point of illustration I suppose.

 

When I look at Ferland - for example, relative to a player like Nick Foligno....I'm not sure he weighs in that favourably - compared to a guy playing on Columbus' 3rd line - with 2 years of term remaining....who might be considered to be in cap-dump territory (may gain an asset to eat that contract).  

There are obvious cautions with a Foligno - ie that he's in part being carrried by a helluva pair of linemates on that 3rd line (Jenner - who I'd pay heavily for - and Anderson - a pair of 'beasts' imo), not unlike Ferland's linemates in Calgary or Carolina - and Foligno's paltry powerplay production is also a concern....but the point being that he's a reaonable comparable to a Ferland - but with 2 yrs remaining at 5.5.....and possibly a player whose terms they are eager to shed.

16 goals, 30 pts.

156 hits.

39.2% ozone starts, 47.8% corsi

37 takeaways, +14 turnovers

And like Ferland - a willing combatant / probably tougher than Ferland tbh.

2 yrs x 5.5 - and possibly gain a pick/asset to relieve Columbus of that contract.....

A shorter term risk, while bringing placeholding toughness to the lineup.

 

[theo5789]

42 minutes ago, oldnews said:

No doubt.  And a willing combatant when necessary.

 

But I''m going to spin an alternative for a minute - not a proposal, but a point of illustration I suppose.

 

When I look at Ferland - for example, relative to a player like Nick Foligno....I'm not sure he weighs in that favourably - compared to a guy playing on Columbus' 3rd line - with 2 years of term remaining....who might be considered to be in cap-dump territory (may gain an asset to eat that contract).  

There are obvious cautions with a Foligno - ie that he's in part being carrried by a helluva pair of linemates on that 3rd line (Jenner - who I'd pay heavily for - and Anderson - a pair of 'beasts' imo), not unlike Ferland's linemates in Calgary or Carolina - and Foligno's paltry powerplay production is also a concern....but the point being that he's a reaonable comparable to a Ferland - but with 2 yrs remaining at 5.5.....and possibly a player whose terms they are eager to shed.

16 goals, 30 pts.

156 hits.

39.2% ozone starts, 47.8% corsi

37 takeaways, +14 turnovers

And like Ferland - a willing combatant / probably tougher than Ferland tbh.

2 yrs x 5.5 - and possibly gain a pick/asset to relieve Columbus of that contract.....

A shorter term risk, while bringing placeholding toughness to the lineup.

 

Foligno is an intriguing target. Zack Smith is another option for me if we can add a pick or upgrade a prospect in an additional swap. Smith could put up 30-35 points. Kyle

 Clifford would be another option for me in the bargain bin shopping. Not much of a points guy, but is physical and can slot in and out of the lineup as needed.

[I.Am.Ironman]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

So a 23ish goal pace over 82 games and I'd bet he'd easily hit 25 with Petey.  When you consider everything else he brings to the table, he's be a difference maker in Van, imo.  If the term was good, the money would be worthwhile.

I stand by it being too high of a risk. I can see him dropping off, especially with his concussion issues this year. And "if the term is good"... rarely is in the UFA market.

 

What would you pay him?

[Provost]

I think our proximity to a playoff position is largely a mirage.

 

Not many games left to lake up points, a lot of teams between us and a wildcard spot and we would have to outplay them all.  Add in the fact some of the teams above us play each other which means guaranteed points for at least one of them...

 

We would have to go like 7-1 or 6-2 to even have a chance, while hoping everyone else above us craps the bed.

[stawns]

13 minutes ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

I stand by it being too high of a risk. I can see him dropping off, especially with his concussion issues this year. And "if the term is good"... rarely is in the UFA market.

 

What would you pay him?

If the term was 3 years, I'd think he'd get somewhere in the $5m-ish range and the Canucks could easily absorb that.

 

I actually think Ferland is low risk.  He can play on any line in many different roles......worst case scenario, you get a bit of a LE situation, which isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be.........aside from term, obviously.  The concussion risk might be significant for him, personally, but if it's a truly an issue and it gets worse, they park him on ltir. 

 

I would agree, more, if they gave up something in a trade for him and he declined rapidly or injuries played a significant part in his decline.  But the only risk is monetary and the Canucks are in a position where they can take some risks financially..........short-ish term.

 

The one thing that I think all of CDC can agree on us that they need someone riding shotgun with Petey........Ferland is tough, Kassian style unhinged and he can pot 20-25 while making sure Petey has some room to do his thing.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

No doubt.  And a willing combatant when necessary.

 

But I''m going to spin an alternative for a minute - not a proposal, but a point of illustration I suppose.

 

When I look at Ferland - for example, relative to a player like Nick Foligno....I'm not sure he weighs in that favourably - compared to a guy playing on Columbus' 3rd line - with 2 years of term remaining....who might be considered to be in cap-dump territory (may gain an asset to eat that contract).  

There are obvious cautions with a Foligno - ie that he's in part being carrried by a helluva pair of linemates on that 3rd line (Jenner - who I'd pay heavily for - and Anderson - a pair of 'beasts' imo), not unlike Ferland's linemates in Calgary or Carolina - and Foligno's paltry powerplay production is also a concern....but the point being that he's a reaonable comparable to a Ferland - but with 2 yrs remaining at 5.5.....and possibly a player whose terms they are eager to shed.

16 goals, 30 pts.

156 hits.

39.2% ozone starts, 47.8% corsi

37 takeaways, +14 turnovers

And like Ferland - a willing combatant / probably tougher than Ferland tbh.

2 yrs x 5.5 - and possibly gain a pick/asset to relieve Columbus of that contract.....

A shorter term risk, while bringing placeholding toughness to the lineup.

 

The reason I'm on the Ferland wagon is because you don't lose any assets to get him.  Id love to have Foligno on the Canucks, but I don't think they're in a position to make that kind of move yet.

[I.Am.Ironman]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

If the term was 3 years, I'd think he'd get somewhere in the $5m-ish range and the Canucks could easily absorb that.

 

I actually think Ferland is low risk.  He can play on any line in many different roles......worst case scenario, you get a bit of a LE situation, which isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be.........aside from term, obviously.  The concussion risk might be significant for him, personally, but if it's a truly an issue and it gets worse, they park him on ltir. 

 

I would agree, more, if they gave up something in a trade for him and he declined rapidly or injuries played a significant part in his decline.  But the only risk is monetary and the Canucks are in a position where they can take some risks financially..........short-ish term.

 

The one thing that I think all of CDC can agree on us that they need someone riding shotgun with Petey........Ferland is tough, Kassian style unhinged and he can pot 20-25 while making sure Petey has some room to do his thing.

1st point: I don't think 3 years reels him in. If he was willing to do 3x5 I'd do it to.

2nd point: My concern would be his concussion issues altering his style of play. If I were him I would alter the way I played as well...I say that from my couch of course.

3rd point: I agree but again, I don't think Ferland is interested in short-ish term.

4th point: I agree. I don't think that player is a 6x6 player though, or shouldn't be anyway.

 

 

[oldnews]

8 minutes ago, stawns said:

The reason I'm on the Ferland wagon is because you don't lose any assets to get him.  Id love to have Foligno on the Canucks, but I don't think they're in a position to make that kind of move yet.

I'm not sure you lose assets taking on Foligno's contract....might be wrong about that, but he has 3 pts more than LE, and a 5.5 million cap hit....

As an alternative that would be a two year term as opposed to 6 or 7, that's the kind of thing I might look at if a younger emerging comparable isn't a possibility.

[oldnews]

wrong thread.

[IBatch]

21 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Serious question, do teams that have "enforcers" and teams that "stand up for each other" never experience their top players getting hit?

 

This honestly sounds as whiny as when Edmonton was complaining that McDavid was being checked too well and couldn't "showcase" himself.

Hitting is fine, it’s the cheap shots that are not, elbows or stickwork or Jujitsu rolls or WWE arm throws.   Yes there is an athlete who was able to showcase his talent his entire career, yes he was hit cleanly his fair share, and yes bullies shied away.  Gilles who was one of the leagues most feared fighters and in a way one of NYI enforcers to keep Bossy, Trottier etc safe from harm, has said multiple times he had Gretzky lined up on the numbers but wouldn’t hit him, because he knew without a doubt that from there on he’d have to deal with Semenko, Messier and the entire team whenever they played again for the rest of his career.   When one of the toughest guys ever to play the game says something like that you should listen. 

 

Sather also said hitting Gretzky was like trying to hit smoke...who do you believe?  I think it’s somehwere in the middle.  Intimidation, respectability, accountability and the CODE all play a part.  But the bottom line there was a time when a new player trying to make a name for himself hit a star like Gretzky with a cheap shot, found himself buried in the minors forever.  The league has changed.  It is open season on stars even with some level of intimidation in the lineup, it happens anyways (McDavid takes a viscous elbow, Lucic lumbers along and does nothing) EP the same.  

 

Personally i do think this is on the coaches to a large degree. They should be nailing anyone to the bench and sticking them in the doghouse if they calmly skate by after a star takes abuse. It’s on the players  themselves too though, some have the protector gene in spades some don’t, but everyone actually has it fear keeps it from coming to the surface.  The coaches should be doing their best to activate it on every player on the ice.  Tell them exactly what they should do every time anyone is cheap shotted...more than a facewash. Utterly destroy them each and every time.  The rest of league will take notice. We no longer have bodyguards, it’s back to pre expansion rolling four lines with the best players in the world.  They just haven’t figured out how to play without enforcers yet.  Until they do expect stars to fall come springtime.  Or at least take way more abuse than they should.

 

[theo5789]

2 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Hitting is fine, it’s the cheap shots that are not, elbows or stickwork or Jujitsu rolls or WWE arm throws.   Yes there is an athlete who was able to showcase his talent his entire career, yes he was hit cleanly his fair share, and yes bullies shied away.  Gilles who was one of the leagues most feared fighters and in a way one of NYI enforcers to keep Bossy, Trottier etc safe from harm, has said multiple times he had Gretzky lined up on the numbers but wouldn’t hit him, because he knew without a doubt that from there on he’d have to deal with Semenko, Messier and the entire team whenever they played again for the rest of his career.   When one of the toughest guys ever to play the game says something like that you should listen. 

 

Sather also said hitting Gretzky was like trying to hit smoke...who do you believe?  I think it’s somehwere in the middle.  Intimidation, respectability, accountability and the CODE all play a part.  But the bottom line there was a time when a new player trying to make a name for himself hit a star like Gretzky with a cheap shot, found himself buried in the minors forever.  The league has changed.  It is open season on stars even with some level of intimidation in the lineup, it happens anyways (McDavid takes a viscous elbow, Lucic lumbers along and does nothing) EP the same.  

 

Personally i do think this is on the coaches to a large degree. They should be nailing anyone to the bench and sticking them in the doghouse if they calmly skate by after a star takes abuse. It’s on the players  themselves too though, some have the protector gene in spades some don’t, but everyone actually has it fear keeps it from coming to the surface.  The coaches should be doing their best to activate it on every player on the ice.  Tell them exactly what they should do every time anyone is cheap shotted...more than a facewash. Utterly destroy them each and every time.  The rest of league will take notice. We no longer have bodyguards, it’s back to pre expansion rolling four lines with the best players in the world.  They just haven’t figured out how to play without enforcers yet.  Until they do expect stars to fall come springtime.  Or at least take way more abuse than they should.

 

I understand there was a time when enforcers were effective, but the Gilles and Semenko days are long past. In today's game, it doesn't seem to matter as much. If a player wants to target our star players or any others, they will (see Tkachuks). Our team last night showed we won't cower to any stupid antics and then Calgary decides to start flopping when they realized we weren't backing down.

 

The league added the instigator rule basically saying that the league will take care of the stupid antics so enforcers shouldn't have to. Now of course the league hasn't exactly done their part, but the rules still exist to neuter the enforcers. So this is more of a league problem where they want to showcase the speed, skill and talent of the players (which is perfectly fine), but they need to do their job and take the garbage out. It is not the coaches' fault to expect the league to hold their end of the bargain while they focus on winning the game at hand.

 

So back to the original topic, it looked like last night was an example in a "playoff type atmosphere" that we won't back down from physical play. We didn't lose because we got "destroyed" physically but rather that we didn't have the depth to match theirs and we still kept the game within reach which is commendable when they are considered contenders. And at the same time, when the playoffs happen, the intensity does go up, but it's not like teams will be throwing cheap shots left and right trying to injure the star players. With that said, no we still probably aren't ready for that intensity either, but the experience is important for our young players to go through to learn what they can or cannot get away with when they do reach the playoffs.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

I understand there was a time when enforcers were effective, but the Gilles and Semenko days are long past. In today's game, it doesn't seem to matter as much. If a player wants to target our star players or any others, they will (see Tkachuks). Our team last night showed we won't cower to any stupid antics and then Calgary decides to start flopping when they realized we weren't backing down.

 

The league added the instigator rule basically saying that the league will take care of the stupid antics so enforcers shouldn't have to. Now of course the league hasn't exactly done their part, but the rules still exist to neuter the enforcers. So this is more of a league problem where they want to showcase the speed, skill and talent of the players (which is perfectly fine), but they need to do their job and take the garbage out. It is not the coaches' fault to expect the league to hold their end of the bargain while they focus on winning the game at hand.

 

So back to the original topic, it looked like last night was an example in a "playoff type atmosphere" that we won't back down from physical play. We didn't lose because we got "destroyed" physically but rather that we didn't have the depth to match theirs and we still kept the game within reach which is commendable when they are considered contenders. And at the same time, when the playoffs happen, the intensity does go up, but it's not like teams will be throwing cheap shots left and right trying to injure the star players. With that said, no we still probably aren't ready for that intensity either, but the experience is important for our young players to go through to learn what they can or cannot get away with when they do reach the playoffs.

I think we are saying the same things but in different ways.  I do think that star players are more open to taking abuse then they used to, but I’m taking almost pre 2000s.  Crosby has taken more abuse than stars before him no doubt, his entire career.  

The rats don’t seem to be as common as they used to be, the league doesn’t have a demon to hate anymore now that Cook, Marchment, the guy Domi clocked and was cheered on as a hero that took out Neely knees etc.  But the average player now can do something blatantly wrong without expecting immediate retribution against most teams, and it happens almost on a weekly basis.  Just go back and see how many one or two game first time offenders guys have been suspended for  the last few years ... they know they each get a freebie more or less and that freebie could make the difference in a series.  

 

I dont have any confidence at all that the league will ever police the game properly, they’ve shown no stomach for it since inception.  The only thing they’ve done a good job on recently is cutting down on slashing hands penalties (which wasn’t around like the epidemic it became post enforcer) Johnny Hockey was slashed 22 times in one game a couple years ago, and finally they broke his fingers (they were literally black and blue after one week that season)...  Crosby himself participated in the mayhem after getting slashed so much he’d had enough and nearly took Methots finger right off.  

 

Why would it get to that point in the first place (slashing)?  That’s a big sign of disrespect.  It’s no surprise they cut down on slashing, and scoring has sky-rocketed thanks in most part to sub-six footers (which is great).  Also no surprise most enforcers were layed off or demoted before that.

 

My issue is with from following  hockey since MTL and NYI dynasties is the amount of abuse super-stars have to endure in today’s game.  Even ex teammates will run you as Niskanen did against Crosby their last cup run (head shot with stick) ... Fluery crosses out his name on his mask in response now that will keep him in line.  The Sedins took a ton of abuse too.  

 

Maybe I was too young but I don’t remember guys doing that to Lafluer (Robinson) or Bossy (Gilles etc) or Gretzky (Semenko, McSorely), at least not often and when it did happen it was huge news.   Now it’s just part of the weekly highlights.  Hockey was also a lot more violent and rougher back then.  Maybe it’s just a respect issue.  I get the idea of trying to knock a star out of a series, what I don’t get is the other team(s) not backing their stars up.  

 

Don’t know if this ever will be fixed...it’s up to the players now (and the coaches) and to protect themselves and their teammates, there’s no big brother anymore to take a beating or give one depending on what’s going on.  It’s a little frustrating and I’m mostly venting. I can accept it I guess.   Big steps with the slashing crack down which is great.  We will see what happens this year hopefully there won’t be that many shameful incidents.

[bluesman60]

The Canucks should not make the playoffs this year because they need another solid draft. There has to be enough talented depth players to call up when the injuries happen and in the playoffs they always do. 

There are only a handful of games left and fans who are hoping for the playoffs are the same people who bet their mortgage payment on Lotto Max....the odds of making the playoffs are extremely long and the odds of making it out of the 1st round are incredibly huge.

If people are a fan, they will support the rebuild in it's entirety and let the process be complete. This team is still 2-3 years away from making some playoff noise and the best way to be successful is to draft high end talent.....not projects that will be ready when Bo Horvat is ready to retire. 

This is the year that Benning should be a seller and collect picks. A few games ago, the Canucks were in a position to draft 6th.....they go out and win another couple and now we are drafting at 8th. Wins right now mean a lot to the young players but I think most would agree that getting another player in the Pety, Bouser, Horvat mold would do a lot more to advance the team next year than if they draft a hit and miss project.

 

[Rob_Zepp]

On 3/23/2019 at 1:18 PM, I.Am.Ironman said:

When he is healthy and at his best I totally agree. That playoff series was 3 years ago though, he was younger and coming off of only playing less than 60 games combined with AHL/NHL. He was fresher and hungrier. I am not underselling what he could potentially bring to the table. I just think it would be very risky to go hard after him in the off season. He has battled concussions and UBIs all year this year, which will make it tough for him to keep up a physical style of play and likely affect his motivation to play that way.

 

He has 17G, 19A (62 games) playing with very skilled players and has been ice cold for the last month or so. I don't think that production is worth the money he will likely get or be asking for. Maybe @Rob_Zepp can give us some input on his physical play with the canes this year and if his style of play has changed following his injuries.

 

I think the risk is too high for us to regret tying up that amount of cap in him.

Ferland has been disciplined but plays very heavy.   The Canes though are defined by speed.   They are relentless on the forecheck and dump and chase better than most any team in the league not based near Disneyworld.   However, the real key for the Canes was ridding themselves of a couple of players with potential but uneven drive and ability to play in dirty areas and allow others to take those spots.   Further, as much as some want to say DH has not played well - he has been outstanding for past three months.    

[I.Am.Ironman]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Ferland has been disciplined but plays very heavy.   The Canes though are defined by speed.   They are relentless on the forecheck and dump and chase better than most any team in the league not based near Disneyworld.   However, the real key for the Canes was ridding themselves of a couple of players with potential but uneven drive and ability to play in dirty areas and allow others to take those spots.   Further, as much as some want to say DH has not played well - he has been outstanding for past three months.    

If you were JB.. what would you be willing to throw at Ferland? Do you think it would be a good add from an organizational standpoint based on how he has played and his injury history?

[Shirotashi]

On 3/22/2019 at 11:04 PM, Jester13 said:

I still think it's more worth the experience, even if they get pummeled, for two reasons:

 

1) It shows even more to management that we need some more toughness; and,

 

2) It shows our team that we need to train as hard as possible in the off season and get stronger.

 

There are other reasons why I think it's better, but this thread is about what it's about. 

You really want MORE of this:

Orrr maybe we see someone like this guy he did ok against us on Chicago as well if i recall:

LOL heres a WHOLE compilation of 1 single player shutting down a 60million dollar hockey team. 1. Single. Player.

Let the people who think that theres no place for toughness in todays NHL remember you dont need alot of toughness ^^ theres an example of 1 player that shelved an ENTIRE team. The way Chara/Marchand would IF we faced them, The way Gudbranson would IF we ever faced them. You see an entire team CAN and HAVE been held in check by 1 single player. 

The good news is we have the likes of Tryamkin that could join us, we have Pearson, we have Virtanen continuing to grow. I know that JB understands the need for toughness im not worried about the future BUT if the playoffs were a reality we would be out in round 1 to a number of teams based on team toughness alone.

[Shirotashi]

The Ferland Highlights are really something, 1 player causing the mental collapse of a whole hockey team because

he threw good hits and got under some skin. 1 player. I swear if i ever watch 1 player dominate this team the way

that man did I will never watch another Canucks game as long as I breath air. Absolute domination by one player

with absolutely zero effective response because.... we didnt have one.