Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Speculation] Canucks Likely to push for Gardiner on July 1st


Recommended Posts

On 4/13/2019 at 12:49 PM, Top Sven Baercheese said:

Would MUCH rather Myers. 

Agreed.  He can skate well for a huge guy, adds size(obviously).  Right side D which we need. Perfect D partner for Hughes.

 

Hughes Myers

Edler Tanev

Hutton Stecher

Schenn

 

Not too shabby especially the 3rd pairing which can move up when Tanev &/or Edler are hurt.  If we could add another D-man that's great(maybe to replace Tanev or Hutton) but this actually doesn't look bad.  Myers will likely have to be over paid though, which i think i'm OK with due to being one of the only good right side D-men available.

Edited by brian42
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Built through an expansion draft in one year is not a rebuild.  You missed my point...

No I think you missed the point. It's not a rebuild... it's a build. If you build a brand new house and it doesn't have anything major wrong with it you don't rebuild it a year later. You might decide to put a different showerhead in but that is not a rebuild.

 

To think that the knights would be rebuilding after 1 season and a Stanley cup finals appearance is insane, their roster is nearly identical to last years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I take your point more to be that you don't necessarily need to draft 'elite' players to be a contender.

Virtually everything Vegas got - were on the edge of team's expansion lists - ie a whole team full of 4D, 7/8 forwards, etc.

That makes for one hell of a deep team though - and the ability to stockpile 4D - some of them just emerging - as were some of their forwards.

Not necessarily a single "elite" player there prior to arriving in Vegas.

I don't necessarily 'they add Stone and are now contenders' fits the story = they were already contenders - and added more than Stone this year - but for me the lesson that people might have learned in paying attention to Vegas - is that it's a team game - and deep teams can compete and win as readily as teams with a few 'elite' pieces.   'Elite' players can help - but regardless, a team needs to be built from top to bottom, and those key gamechangers don't necessarily have to come out of the top 5 or 10 picks of the draft.  So many people get hung up on this myth - that lottery picks will make you a contender.  Karlsson, Marchessault, Tuch, Smith, Scmidt, Theodore, etc = nothing resembling a lottery champion.

I fully agree and yes my point was that we don't need to be drafting every year in the top 5 to build an elite team and acquire elite players.  You are bang on about Vegas.  They never took even one elite player other than maybe Fleury from any team because all of the elite players were protected.  As you mentioned they took all those 4D and 3rd line guys and young players that still hadn't fully developed yet,. i.e. Shea Theodore, and they built a very deep team, one that could compete right away.  Yes Stone wasn't the only piece they added and they were elite before him, but he was one ELITE piece that they acquired this year that could give them an advantage to make a deep run this year.  And as per the last game Stone certainly did not disappoint.

 

Vancouver needs to take a lesson from Vegas and start acquiring more hard working middle of the pack players instead of focusing on getting Jack Hughes.  Adding a bunch of guys like Anders Lee and Brett Connolly along with a couple decent defencemen will take them much farther than adding one elite piece like Jack Hughes.  That's why Benning will not trade up and mortgage the farm to get Hughes.  It's because he doesn't have to.  Look at Ryan Reaves last night.  He made a bigger difference to Vegas than William Nylander did to Toronto.  So why pay all that money for an elite right winger when you can just get a Reaves for cheap who can bang and crash and cause havoc to the opponent?

 

At the end of the day to succeed long term you do need some elite pieces, and getting a few players like BO, Petey, Brock and Hughes has set this franchise up for the next decade.  However I don't agree that we need to add any more elite pieces, we have enough and that was my main point.  We also have a bunch of prospects who are not even in the lineup yet who will add to our core.  We need to go out and get some beef and sandpaper to compete with the likes of Vegas, the Islanders, St. Louis, Colorado, etc.  Adding a couple guys like Lee and Connolly would do the trick.  If we can add a strong mobile top 4D to the backend then this team is pretty much complete.  And we may already have that type of Dman in the system in Tryamkin.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, coryberg said:

No I think you missed the point. It's not a rebuild... it's a build. If you build a brand new house and it doesn't have anything major wrong with it you don't rebuild it a year later. You might decide to put a different showerhead in but that is not a rebuild.

 

To think that the knights would be rebuilding after 1 season and a Stanley cup finals appearance is insane, their roster is nearly identical to last years.

Vegas never built a new house.  They took a bunch of leftover parts from other houses and made their own little getaway.  Building a new house would be acquiring elite top end talent through the draft, which is what Vancouver has been doing.  Having some elite pieces is great but we don't have to keep building through the draft forever in order to become an elite team.  That was my point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I fully agree and yes my point was that we don't need to be drafting every year in the top 5 to build an elite team and acquire elite players.  You are bang on about Vegas.  They never took even one elite player other than maybe Fleury from any team because all of the elite players were protected.  As you mentioned they took all those 4D and 3rd line guys and young players that still hadn't fully developed yet,. i.e. Shea Theodore, and they built a very deep team, one that could compete right away.  Yes Stone wasn't the only piece they added and they were elite before him, but he was one ELITE piece that they acquired this year that could give them an advantage to make a deep run this year.  And as per the last game Stone certainly did not disappoint.

 

Vancouver needs to take a lesson from Vegas and start acquiring more hard working middle of the pack players instead of focusing on getting Jack Hughes.  Adding a bunch of guys like Anders Lee and Brett Connolly along with a couple decent defencemen will take them much farther than adding one elite piece like Jack Hughes.  That's why Benning will not trade up and mortgage the farm to get Hughes.  It's because he doesn't have to.  Look at Ryan Reaves last night.  He made a bigger difference to Vegas than William Nylander did to Toronto.  So why pay all that money for an elite right winger when you can just get a Reaves for cheap who can bang and crash and cause havoc to the opponent?

 

At the end of the day to succeed long term you do need some elite pieces, and getting a few players like BO, Petey, Brock and Hughes has set this franchise up for the next decade.  However I don't agree that we need to add any more elite pieces, we have enough and that was my main point.  We also have a bunch of prospects who are not even in the lineup yet who will add to our core.  We need to go out and get some beef and sandpaper to compete with the likes of Vegas, the Islanders, St. Louis, Colorado, etc.  Adding a couple guys like Lee and Connolly would do the trick.  If we can add a strong mobile top 4D to the backend then this team is pretty much complete.  And we may already have that type of Dman in the system in Tryamkin. 

I agree with what you're getting at - and for me I'd target similar players - Nelson/Lee - Connolly could be a good bargain signing who is just emerging - or a viable middle six if he doesn't uptick much more - I'd probably prefer a LW and a guy slightly bigger/more physical, but he's the kind of player that makes sense imo - ones that are at the edge of their prime, haven't yet commanded a big contract and are relatively versatile, so they're not huge risks / big contracts.

Particularly at this stage - I would be more happy if they seek one of these 'middling' guys that can step up into the top 6 in the shorter run, if they own it they stay,  if the team drafts or develops a guy that pushes them down, not a huge deal.  It's the more strictly high end one-way players with significant decline risk that I'd stay away from, as well as the Karlson types that the day they arrive pose a road block and significant limitation on a player like Hughes' role.

So I'd look to sign a forward that isn't going to cause a great deal of cap inflexibility if they wind up in the middle as opposed to top 6 - and who are versatile.  Among defenseman, I'd aim slightly 'lower' at a Stralman type, who'd be a helluva placeholder, not command a great deal of term, and could be a great complement in the shorter run regardless, if the team is more competitive short term than anticipated -which is a distinct possibility if the quality depth remains healthy, young guys continue to push for spots, and the youth already here continue to uptick.   A relatively good value UFA signing enables them to continue to improve the team, take advantage of every opportunity to add good assets, but not commit such a vital role - and such huge cap over term, to a D who'd push a player like Hughes into a secondary role.  With a forward that's not really an issue, particularly if you pick the right two-way versatile guy.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2019 at 9:00 AM, SilentSam said:

Yes, Benning talks to his agent monthly if not bi-weekly according to his agent Todd Diamond.

Tryamkin can buy his way out of his contract in the KHL at any time during his off season.

If he gets a signing bonus from Benning, it’s sure to pay off the contract he is in for one more year..  reported to be possibly less than 1m USD per year.

.. and with 1 year left in that contract in the KHL with Avtomobilist, any thing is possible.

nothing wrong with chatting but anything to do with coming back or whatever is tampering.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I fully agree and yes my point was that we don't need to be drafting every year in the top 5 to build an elite team and acquire elite players.  You are bang on about Vegas.  They never took even one elite player other than maybe Fleury from any team because all of the elite players were protected.  As you mentioned they took all those 4D and 3rd line guys and young players that still hadn't fully developed yet,. i.e. Shea Theodore, and they built a very deep team, one that could compete right away.  Yes Stone wasn't the only piece they added and they were elite before him, but he was one ELITE piece that they acquired this year that could give them an advantage to make a deep run this year.  And as per the last game Stone certainly did not disappoint.

 

Vancouver needs to take a lesson from Vegas and start acquiring more hard working middle of the pack players instead of focusing on getting Jack Hughes.  Adding a bunch of guys like Anders Lee and Brett Connolly along with a couple decent defencemen will take them much farther than adding one elite piece like Jack Hughes.  That's why Benning will not trade up and mortgage the farm to get Hughes.  It's because he doesn't have to.  Look at Ryan Reaves last night.  He made a bigger difference to Vegas than William Nylander did to Toronto.  So why pay all that money for an elite right winger when you can just get a Reaves for cheap who can bang and crash and cause havoc to the opponent?

 

At the end of the day to succeed long term you do need some elite pieces, and getting a few players like BO, Petey, Brock and Hughes has set this franchise up for the next decade.  However I don't agree that we need to add any more elite pieces, we have enough and that was my main point.  We also have a bunch of prospects who are not even in the lineup yet who will add to our core.  We need to go out and get some beef and sandpaper to compete with the likes of Vegas, the Islanders, St. Louis, Colorado, etc.  Adding a couple guys like Lee and Connolly would do the trick.  If we can add a strong mobile top 4D to the backend then this team is pretty much complete.  And we may already have that type of Dman in the system in Tryamkin.

Yup, sign a Nelson/Lee/Dzingel etc, maybe Stralman and/or trade (cheap) for a guy like Ceci on D (though I'd also kick tires on the likes of Ristolainen/Foote etc) and focus on getting Tryamkin back this or next year while continuing to draft and keep our likely increasingly mid 1st picks.

 

Slowly keep moving out Tanev, Hutton, Sutter, Baer etc for futures or other needed parts as we improve.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, oldnews said:

I agree with what you're getting at - and for me I'd target similar players - Nelson/Lee - Connolly could be a good bargain signing who is just emerging - or a viable middle six if he doesn't uptick much more - I'd probably prefer a LW and a guy slightly bigger/more physical, but he's the kind of player that makes sense imo - ones that are at the edge of their prime, haven't yet commanded a big contract and are relatively versatile, so they're not huge risks / big contracts.

Particularly at this stage - I would be more happy if they seek one of these 'middling' guys that can step up into the top 6 in the shorter run, if they own it they stay,  if the team drafts or develops a guy that pushes them down, not a huge deal.  It's the more strictly high end one-way players with significant decline risk that I'd stay away from, as well as the Karlson types that the day they arrive pose a road block and significant limitation on a player like Hughes' role.

So I'd look to sign a forward that isn't going to cause a great deal of cap inflexibility if they wind up in the middle as opposed to top 6 - and who are versatile.  Among defenseman, I'd aim slightly 'lower' at a Stralman type, who'd be a helluva placeholder, not command a great deal of term, and could be a great complement in the shorter run regardless, if the team is more competitive short term than anticipated -which is a distinct possibility if the quality depth remains healthy, young guys continue to push for spots, and the youth already here continue to uptick.   A relatively good value UFA signing enables them to continue to improve the team, take advantage of every opportunity to add good assets, but not commit such a vital role - and such huge cap over term, to a D who'd push a player like Hughes into a secondary role.  With a forward that's not really an issue, particularly if you pick the right two-way versatile guy.

IMHO the Vegas scenario was more than unique in that they got to pick players from every club in the NHL during their expansion draft. They came out of that draft with more depth and draft picks than Jim Benning could have w*t dreams about. They avoided a 10 year process of team building. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

IMHO the Vegas scenario was more than unique in that they got to pick players from every club in the NHL during their expansion draft. They came out of that draft with more depth and draft picks than Jim Benning could have w*t dreams about. They avoided a 10 year process of team building. 

Yeah - it was highly favourable and designed to furnish them with exceptional depth - and not only their complement of picks (including a 3rd overall) - but also a wealth of tradeable assets if they selected well.  I think people in general seriously under-rated what you can get taking 4th D and 7/8F from every team in the league.   I don't like how spoon-fed the conditions were for them - I don't think it's fair to the fanbases / customers in the rest of the league - and the payday the NHL got does not translate back to them imo - it comes at their/our expense.

Edited by oldnews
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

Yup, sign a Nelson/Lee/Dzingel etc, maybe Stralman and/or trade (cheap) for a guy like Ceci on D (though I'd also kick tires on the likes of Ristolainen/Foote etc) and focus on getting Tryamkin back this or next year while continuing to draft and keep our likely increasingly mid 1st picks.

 

Slowly keep moving out Tanev, Hutton, Sutter, Baer etc for futures or other needed parts as we improve.

the rights to Stralman might be available in about 8 hours :lol:

 

I doubt Lee wants to go anywhere, but maybe Dzingel. Still curious what it will take to sign Ferland, I do think he'd add a needed dimension to the EP-Boeser line, very much in line with Burr and the Sedins. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yeah, talk about going out with a fizzle... :wacko:

its freaky.

 

Its not over yet tho, there may be an epic collapse in Torts future. Should be a good one tonight tho, if Tampa's not desperate for this one then they should be booted.

 

The NYI are the ones really impressing me tho. I wanted Trotz here, but the timing wasn't right. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, oldnews said:

  I don't like how spoon-fed the conditions were for them - I don't think it's fair to the fanbases / customers in the rest of the league

You'd rather they be sentenced to a decade of irrelevance for the sins of being a new team like Columbus? That isn't good for anyone, especially not the NHL.

 

Vegas being good had nothing to do with the expansion draft rules being too lenient and everything to do with stupid managers making stupid decisions. Florida handed them a top line and award winning coach. Minny sent them an entire 2nd line. That wasn't the NHL's fault. Seattle won't be nearly as successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, mephnick said:

You'd rather they be sentenced to a decade of irrelevance for the sins of being a new team like Columbus?

?

Those are your words - that are an odd assumption - one extreme counterpoint to another.

If someone thinks they (Vegas) were extremely/overly fortunate with the expansion terms - it doesn't follow that they should be sentenced to a decade or irrelevence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...