The likelihood of Edler and Tanev being successfully replaced within the system

[aGENT]

21 hours ago, kloubek said:

Juolevi I can see. But you would rather have Sautner or Brisebois?  Don't get me wrong - they looked ok when called up but imo neither guy contributes anything.  Sautner got 1 assist in 17 games and Brisebois did nothing in 8.  At least Hutton got 20 in 69 games.

 

With that said, I would rather see Tryamkin fill the 3rd LD role.  What he brings is obvious... though he would likely score even less than Hutton.

While neither are likely to be better than bottom pairing D men should they continue to develop well (which you need BTW), they weren't particularly recalled nor have either particularly been touted for, their ability to put up points. 

 

Kinda of whiffs on their value and what they bring. Sautner played a very sound defensively and physical game and Brisebois showed a solid Tanev-light (with the same quiet offensive play) upside.

 

Are they going to be major pieces we 'build' the D around? Not likely. But they can certainly be solid depth pieces and fixating on their point totals in very early call ups, under FAR from ideal conditions is a ENTIRELY misreading the situation IMO to the point of near irrelevance of your 'point'.

 

 

[Me_]

23 hours ago, oldnews said:

Uh - I disagree - it doesn't work like that - and if he's Hughes partner next year, I think the offseason efforts of management came up short - which is not to underplay how nice it was to have him placholding down the stretch this year - but you can't win a job the following season in 18 games of placeholding, when a team is clearly transitioning and looking to remake parts of it's blueline.  I think what he earned is another NHL contract - but a job has to be earned when the chips are on the table next fall.

Fair assessment. It is known though, that with the demotion from Anaheim, Schenn has had his scare; how realist one can fall of the NHL.

 

If he continues what yes done with the Canucks, there a great chance he’s on a contract starting next season.

[oldnews]

Just now, Me_ said:

Fair assessment. It is known though, that with the demotion from Anaheim, Schenn has had his scare; how realist one can fall of the NHL.

 

If he continues what yes done with the Canucks, there a great chance he’s on a contract starting next season.

I think he'll get another contract.  He had a really horrible small sample in Anaheim that landed him in the AHL - and who knows what all the contributing factors were - and he's been serviceable here - as he was in Arizona for two years beforehand.  Throwing hits and standing up for team-mates was great - and he was solid enough down the stretch - but results didn't matter much, so what he was bringing was arguably more important - or at least as important -as results.  The problem however, is how difficult it is to gain footspeed at that point of a career - when guys typically give up another step instead.   There are things that limit his ability to complement a player like Hughes imo.  Hughes was at 84.4% ozone starts in his 5 games, with a 53.7% corsi.  I think ideally you want a more mobile defender, one that's probably more able to stand up at the blueline, prevent entries, and still recover- that is able to get back faster, retrieve pucks/dump ins and start the transition faster - get the puck to Hughes faster, require Hughes to defend less.  I'm not saying Schenn doesn't make the most of what he has to offer, bu there are just limits to his footspeed that I think you want an upgrade in in a partner for Hughes.  In 5 games to end this season - imo it didn't really matter - but I'd be very surprised and borderline shocked if the end of this season indicated Benning/Green et al leaning towards pencilling Schenn into the top 6 next year.   Really like him - but I think more realistically he'd be part of a dedicated 3rd pairing - replacement pairing - with a relatively strict shutdown task - not as a partner for Hughes - ie if the Canucks were to face injuries to Tanev, Stecher, Biega, UFA signing etc, next year, perhaps Schenn moving up to the 3rd pairing (from Utica) alongside a Hutton or whomever, might be a more realistic trajectory.

[riffraff]

13 hours ago, 5nothincanucksohno said:

I could see them both experiencing less injuries if not required to play as much i.e. get Edler into the 19 to 20 min range and Tanev into the 17 to 18 min range. 

 

Was just discussing this last night at dinner with a buddy. But who bumps those two down to 17mins or less?

[kloubek]

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

While neither are likely to be better than bottom pairing D men should they continue to develop well (which you need BTW), they weren't particularly recalled nor have either particularly been touted for, their ability to put up points. 

 

Kinda of whiffs on their value and what they bring. Sautner played a very sound defensively and physical game and Brisebois showed a solid Tanev-light (with the same quiet offensive play) upside.

 

Are they going to be major pieces we 'build' the D around? Not likely. But they can certainly be solid depth pieces and fixating on their point totals in very early call ups, under FAR from ideal conditions is a ENTIRELY misreading the situation IMO to the point of near irrelevance of your 'point'.

 

 

I never said they couldn't be depth pieces.  But the whole thread is about whether we can fix our d from within. Those guys don't do it, imo. I feel we need players who properly fill their roles - first pairing quality players in the first paring and so on.  Right to third pairing. If the title was if we had low end depth or if our prospects have any potential to play in the NHL then fine.  But that isn't the question posed by the OP, and unless I see more from such guys I will continue to have that belief.  You are right, it isn't all about points.  But if you aren't going to score you better be standout in another way if you want to make a difference on a team.  And in my opinion, neither guy did that. I will say, however, that at least they didn't stand out as being inept either.

 

Secondly, I must say that I typically respect your logic and your position in your posts, but I am kinda tired of the fact you seem to value your opinion more than anyone else's.  You may not care, but writing things in a condecending way and acting like your opinion is fact kinda makes you come across a bit of a dink.  Just sayin.

[5nothincanucksohno]

2 hours ago, riffraff said:

Was just discussing this last night at dinner with a buddy. But who bumps those two down to 17mins or less?

Would love to see Hughes on the right side - stick him with Edler and let him explore the entire rink. Would certainly be harder to reduce Edler's TOI but likely more important to significantly reduce Tanev's time (if for nothing else than for him to stay healthy so the team can trade him at the deadline). Maybe sit Tanev every fifth game and rotate in Schenn?

 

Also, I think Hutton should be traded and hope they can uncover a top 4 d-man somewhere (left side likely easier to find) so, over the short-term:

 

Edler Hughes (22 mins)

XXX  Stecher (21 mins)

Juolevi Tanev (17 mins)

 

Sautner, Schenn, Bega, Brisebois, Rafferty, Teves, Chatfield, etc.

 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I never said they couldn't be depth pieces.  But the whole thread is about whether we can fix our d from within. Those guys don't do it, imo. I feel we need players who properly fill their roles - first pairing quality players in the first paring and so on.  Right to third pairing. If the title was if we had low end depth or if our prospects have any potential to play in the NHL then fine.  But that isn't the question posed by the OP, and unless I see more from such guys I will continue to have that belief.  You are right, it isn't all about points.  But if you aren't going to score you better be standout in another way if you want to make a difference on a team.  And in my opinion, neither guy did that. I will say, however, that at least they didn't stand out as being inept either.

 

Secondly, I must say that I typically respect your logic and your position in your posts, but I am kinda tired of the fact you seem to value your opinion more than anyone else's.  You may not care, but writing things in a condecending way and acting like your opinion is fact kinda makes you come across a bit of a dink.  Just sayin.

As you said, bottom pair guys can still be 'part of the solution' (never mind that there's no reason they can't exceed those prognosticated ceilings).

 

As for the top four, we look to have 'some' of the pieces in place. Hughes, Juolevi the most likely and guys like Woo, Rathbone, Stecher, Tryamkin if he returns, etc likely to have some say in it.

 

From there, we'll likely have to trade, continue to draft or sign guys to fill in the blanks.

 

I don't really care what you think I 'come across as'.