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

Micheal Ferland | #79 | LW


-DLC-

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, gameburn said:

You're right: huge trade.  I was only thinking back 5 or 6 years, maybe 7.  But it's a huge change nonetheless.  Even if it were just Hughes playing a full year and Ferland, it would still be a huge change.  Add in Myers, Benn, and Miller and it is really an entirely new team.

Agree, all I meant is it wasn't the first time we added such impact players that made a huge difference

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2019 at 10:43 AM, Pete M said:

idk, if another player (players) can step up and perform to expectation, then playing Ferland on the third line would make this team a very deep team...however, Ferland and Miller will be interchangeable on the 1st and 2nd lines, which will bode well for the Canucks, regardless...

 

Ferland playing with Virtanen may help JV play a more physical game...because Ferland will have Jake's back.

I could easily see Ferland start on the 3rd line with spot duty in the top 6 depending on opponent/game situation/injuries/penalties etc.

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Baer, Horvat, Pearson

Ferland, Sutter, Virtanen/Leivo

Motte, Beagle, Virtanen/Leivo

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am happy with the Ferland signing but at his age he is what he is.  A good 15 to 20 goal guy who is our LW who is able to play up and down the line-up.  With the complications of signing high end talent, a balanced approach would give us the scoring throughout the line up.  With all the changes it will be fun watching how all the lines shake out.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, smithers joe said:

i don’t know if anyone has brought up this point or not. when ferland, a fellow metis, was starting out, he really struggled and was demoted from teams he played for. he thought about retiring from the game. bob hartley  of the flames, connected him with fellow native player, gino ogick to help him prepare  for playing in calgary, and the nhl. 

good old gino, connected to the fer.

thats interesting, I wonder if that helped Ferland to pick Vancouver in the end? 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 9:52 AM, Dixon Ward said:

I love that Benning went out and signed Ferland despite having an already crowded forward group.  They will all have to fight for their spots now.  

The Ferland signing really surprised me. I thought after trading for T.J. Miller, they were done with the forward group. I was thinking Eriksson and Sutter would be back, and Goldobin and Baertschi would battle for the last Top 6 spot. There seems to be too many guys now, but I'm sure they have a plan to work things out. I will say that the Top 6 (even the Top 9) looks very good compared to previous years.

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 9:54 AM, Sbriggs said:

Agree, all I meant is it wasn't the first time we added such impact players that made a huge difference

Without that trade, no Stanley Cup final, totally true. 

 

8 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

The Ferland signing really surprised me. I thought after trading for T.J. Miller, they were done with the forward group. I was thinking Eriksson and Sutter would be back, and Goldobin and Baertschi would battle for the last Top 6 spot. There seems to be too many guys now, but I'm sure they have a plan to work things out. I will say that the Top 6 (even the Top 9) looks very good compared to previous years.

 

 

With these additions we have a legit shot at making the playoffs.  

No idea what they're going to do with Sutter and Eriksson.  Sutter deserves a chance to have a decent year.  How to move Eriksson is a real challenge.  If it weren't for ethics and the long-term image of the team, it would have to be tempting to maroon in Utica in the hopes he quits/negates contract. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, gameburn said:

Without that trade, no Stanley Cup final, totally true. 

 

With these additions we have a legit shot at making the playoffs.  

No idea what they're going to do with Sutter and Eriksson.  Sutter deserves a chance to have a decent year.  How to move Eriksson is a real challenge.  If it weren't for ethics and the long-term image of the team, it would have to be tempting to maroon in Utica in the hopes he quits/negates contract. 

The AHL is likely his destination (either Utica or loaned) because he's our 14th or 15th best forward. Not because we're 'marooning' him.

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gameburn said:

Without that trade, no Stanley Cup final, totally true. 

 

With these additions we have a legit shot at making the playoffs.  

No idea what they're going to do with Sutter and Eriksson.  Sutter deserves a chance to have a decent year.  How to move Eriksson is a real challenge.  If it weren't for ethics and the long-term image of the team, it would have to be tempting to maroon in Utica in the hopes he quits/negates contract. 

There's only 2 options for LE accept a trade Benning manages to make or waivers and send him down to Utica. Thats all we can do, period.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

The AHL is likely his destination (either Utica or loaned) because he's our 14th or 15th best forward. Not because we're 'marooning' him.

I hope he plays like our 14th best guy -- if he does, problem solved.  My fear is that he won't. 

Gagner and Higgins (a few years back) are our best predictors along the line your suggesting.  I really hope you're right: LE is certainly no longer in the top 9.  And other than pk work, I don't see a role for him in the bottom 3.  With guys in the AHL knocking at the door (McEwen and maybe Lind), you may be right.  LE and his agent may see this too.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sbriggs said:

There's only 2 options for LE accept a trade Benning manages to make or waivers and send him down to Utica. Thats all we can do, period.

You think that it's absolutely over for him? I thought it was a real possibility back when LE made his ill-advised comments about Green/his fit on the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, gameburn said:

You think that it's absolutely over for him? I thought it was a real possibility back when LE made his ill-advised comments about Green/his fit on the team. 

I think it should be over for him in Vancouver, respectfully he has done this too himself. We all know his play has been a huge disappointment, but he still has some usefullness just not with us. The only reason we would use him would be to try and value him up so someone takes him, but we've been doing that for a year or two and he just gets worse and now he's speaking to the media about it and that sends a bad message to our young players he's supposed to be mentoring. More damage could be done if JB lets him on the ice with our team

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sbriggs said:

I think it should be over for him in Vancouver, respectfully he has done this too himself. We all know his play has been a huge disappointment, but he still has some usefullness just not with us. The only reason we would use him would be to try and value him up so someone takes him, but we've been doing that for a year or two and he just gets worse and now he's speaking to the media about it and that sends a bad message to our young players he's supposed to be mentoring. More damage could be done if JB lets him on the ice with our team

LE looked like he was going through the motions some games last year, not a lot of perceived effort.  Not all games, of course, but some.

With Ferland, Miller, Myers and Benn, along with the drafting of Podkolzin (famous for his work effort) I think this is a team with a real nice attitude about what it takes to compete. LE will be facing what Gagner did I think: don't tell me how much you're paid, or what you did in your past, show me what you can do this year.

 

I had assumed all along that LE was clearly good enough to make the team, it was just the fact he was hugely overpaid for what he was giving.  An embarrassment. 

 

But... with all the signings, together with the breakout year Virtanen had... together with the return of Sutter... I'm not sure LE makes that team this October. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gameburn said:

LE looked like he was going through the motions some games last year, not a lot of perceived effort.  Not all games, of course, but some.

With Ferland, Miller, Myers and Benn, along with the drafting of Podkolzin (famous for his work effort) I think this is a team with a real nice attitude about what it takes to compete. LE will be facing what Gagner did I think: don't tell me how much you're paid, or what you did in your past, show me what you can do this year.

 

I had assumed all along that LE was clearly good enough to make the team, it was just the fact he was hugely overpaid for what he was giving.  An embarrassment. 

 

But... with all the signings, together with the breakout year Virtanen had... together with the return of Sutter... I'm not sure LE makes that team this October. 

We can only pray

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 3:27 PM, aGENT said:

I could easily see Ferland start on the 3rd line with spot duty in the top 6 depending on opponent/game situation/injuries/penalties etc.

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Baer, Horvat, Pearson

Ferland, Sutter, Virtanen/Leivo

Motte, Beagle, Virtanen/Leivo

Ferland looks good anywhere on those lines... including a pp: Ferland, Pettersson, Boeser; Myers, Hughes. Or Horvat in place of Myers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ferland signing was really good.

In the two seasons averaging out before free agency, Lucic's point per game production was only slightly higher at .61 points per game vs .55 points per game for Ferland. 

The big difference is age and mileage. Ferland is not only two years younger at time of signing the contract, but he has 321 games under his belt vs 647 for Lucic. 

So with all that said, 5x5 for Ferland would have been a very good contract in comparison to Lucic's 7x6 given their age, production, and mileage (making the assumption at the time - not knowing how fast and far Lucic would decline). 

Getting Ferland for 4 x 3.5 is an absolute steal. 

In terms of ranking Benning's offseason moves:

Benn - A: very underrated player, got him at a cheap price on a short term 

Ferland - A-: some risk but getting a physical player at his age and production at that price is excellent

Miller - B-: I like the player and the contract but we paid a hefty 1st round pick to acquire him. I don't know if the team is quite ready to make a move like that given where we are so I am more or less neutral although he gives the team so many different options (first line RW with EP, 2nd line with BO, third line centre etc, physical, can score, etc)

Myers - C: On the fence between a C- and a C. Myers isn't a bad fit, and he is a nice upgrade on Gudbranson. That said he has a lot of flaws in his game and is more of a 4/5 dman who is being paid like a 2/3. The contract could have been worse (many people predicting greater term and $) and the fact we can expose him to the expansion draft tipped the scales from a C- to a C. At best he won't look too bad the first couple of years but I do worry when he gets up there in age that we have a 6 million dollar liability on the roster. 
 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:

The Ferland signing was really good.

In the two seasons averaging out before free agency, Lucic's point per game production was only slightly higher at .61 points per game vs .55 points per game for Ferland. 

The big difference is age and mileage. Ferland is not only two years younger at time of signing the contract, but he has 321 games under his belt vs 647 for Lucic. 

So with all that said, 5x5 for Ferland would have been a very good contract in comparison to Lucic's 7x6 given their age, production, and mileage (making the assumption at the time - not knowing how fast and far Lucic would decline). 

Getting Ferland for 4 x 3.5 is an absolute steal. 

In terms of ranking Benning's offseason moves:

Benn - A: very underrated player, got him at a cheap price on a short term 

Ferland - A-: some risk but getting a physical player at his age and production at that price is excellent

Miller - B-: I like the player and the contract but we paid a hefty 1st round pick to acquire him. I don't know if the team is quite ready to make a move like that given where we are so I am more or less neutral although he gives the team so many different options (first line RW with EP, 2nd line with BO, third line centre etc, physical, can score, etc)

Myers - C: On the fence between a C- and a C. Myers isn't a bad fit, and he is a nice upgrade on Gudbranson. That said he has a lot of flaws in his game and is more of a 4/5 dman who is being paid like a 2/3. The contract could have been worse (many people predicting greater term and $) and the fact we can expose him to the expansion draft tipped the scales from a C- to a C. At best he won't look too bad the first couple of years but I do worry when he gets up there in age that we have a 6 million dollar liability on the roster. 
 

I like Miller a lot, but as of now, I agree with your "B".  I guess the grade will change according to what he and the team do in the next two years.

 

I agree with the Meyers "C".  Not a huge fan and now that it looks like Ristolainen ($5.4m x 3yrs) is available, it looks even worse.  Not that I blame JB for the signing; he couldn't have waited around until now to add to the d. 

  • Upvote 1
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...