[Waivers] September 30th - 39 players (Baertschi, Goldobin, Biega)

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

How about our owner said that LE has to stay, and Green (not wanting LE) will just sit LE in the press box?  I wonder if there could be a rift building between owner and coach?  

Could have waived Motte and/or Schaller and kept Baertschi and Goldobin.

 

Not really a fan of keeping grinders over skilled guys when we have been the lowest scoring team in the league the last three seasons.

 

Edited September 30, 2019 by DeNiro

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, N7Nucks said:

Baetschi was 0.5 PPG, and that was mostly goals. Roussel missed the mark and that was mostly assists. That production was nice but it's not as likely to be sustainable as Baertschi is to be healthy for 65+ games.

As ON was kind enough to point out below, Roussel also did that 38.5% ozone starts in a hard minute, match up role. Baer would be expected to match that production in the bottom 6, in a similar role (vs his cushier, top 6 with 64.8% ozone starts that he enjoyed last year).

 

So Baer at 0.54PPG in a cushy top 6 role vs Roussel at 0.48PPG in a much harder match up (and PK) role. I know who I'm picking for the bottom 6 role. Seems the team does too.

 

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Roussel was the 5th leading scorer last year - as a 'grinder' (who had 38.5% ozone starts).

 

A 3rd line with him and Sutter is a helluva shutdown line - that can also counterpunch effectively (Sutter is capable of scoring 20 goals himself).

 

I remember what Dorsett and Sutter did to the McDavid line on opening night a few years ago - not much breaks a team faster than a team's "grinder line" dominating your franchise player's line....

 

I think it makes perfect sense to have two legit 'bottom 6' lines - first, they create opportunity for both the EP and Horvat lines - and in today's NHL where lots of teams roll without much of a shutdown element and attempt to ice 3 top 6 lines, this actually produces some solid matchup options for Green.  I think it's a formula that works (when the principal parts are healthy).

 

Roussel being a 3LW though is a borderline no-brainer - not sure he can be reduced to a simple 'grinder' as you're suggesting.

 

1 minute ago, Vanuckles said:

 So to say Roussel is a better fit on the 3rd line than Baertschi is asinine.

See above.

[FlyLow_]

53 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Sven doesn't play Schaller's role. Schaller may still get waived when Roussel returns. Who's going to PK if we kept Sven over Schaller?

PK did just fine when Schaller was in the press box all season last year.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

Only on the offensive side of the game - imo the defensive side of the game is what will dictate Gaudette being a winger - which does not stop Gaudette from being creative, producing - if anything, it could free him up to be moreso playing wing, where he won't be engaged in those down low dzone battles - that will be Sutter's duty.  I also think it would be very surprising if Gaudette could improve enough in the faceoff circle to compete with Sutter in that sense, this soon (I'm very doubtful in that respect).  I think it makes more sense to leave Sutter where he is best, and let Gaudette develop without the pressure of 'bottom six' defensive center responsibilities.....And additionally, I don't share the mindset of folks who assume Gaudette is earmarked to be a 3C - who knows - he could exceed that potential as an upside winger.

I guess as a winger as well he could occasionally be put up into the top 6 during games where Green is shaking things up. 

[Gaudette Celly]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Can't agree on this one.

 

Salomaki, for example,  makes 750k.

Too rich for Dubas' capped-out blood.  Doesn't fit into the Leaf's 700 Club.

[VanIsleNuckFan]

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

What does LE have to do with there being no fit for Baertschi?   There is no fit for LE either.  Clearly he's in the same class - of guys replaced.

This is a good question - maybe due to LE more easily being moved if they set him up to have a good season?

 

maybe it's a money thing where we have paid him the majority of his salary and let's make him work for it.

 

orrr... he is much more durable (yes a vanilla player) but these value in having steady Eddie around. 

 

Maybe the plan is the waive LE at a time in the season when he would be claimed, injury bug for other teams etc?

 

Thats all I can think of (during working hours)

[-AJ-]

I wish I could justify creating a new thread, because other than their comments on Goldobin PITB here perfectly encapsulates my feelings on this issue:

 

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/canucks-camp-cuts-sven-baertschi-nikolay-goldobin-and-alex-biega-put-on-waivers-1.23962094

 

Quote

The Canucks had to place several players on waivers on Monday in anticipation of naming their 23-man roster on Tuesday. It was inevitable given the makeup of the Canucks current roster: they have a surprisingly veteran-laden team, with just three waiver-exempt forwards — Elias Pettersson, Brock Boeser, and Adam Gaudette — remaining on the roster heading into Monday.

What’s surprising is who is getting waived. According to these reports, the Canucks will be waiving Nikolay Goldobin, Alex Biega, and Sven Baertschi.

There are reasons to quibble with the waiving of both Goldobin and Biega, but the real shocker is seeing Baertschi hit the waiver wire.

Over the last three seasons, Sven Baertschi has produced points like a high-end second-line winger, borderline first-line winger. He’s been one of the Canucks most efficient and effective forwards on the power play. He battled his way back from injury to rejoin the team last season, confirming he was fully healthy with four games to end the season, where he didn’t hesitate from battling along the boards and getting to the net.

In the preseason, Baertschi was one of the Canucks’ best players, particularly when he was on a line with Adam Gaudette. For all the hype over Gaudette’s preseason, it was Baertschi that helped enable his performance. His two-point night against the Ottawa Senators came off turnovers created by Baertschi: he knocked down an outlet pass to set up Gaudette for a goal, then intercepted a pass in the neutral zone that led to Gaudette’s assist on his goal.

In other words, if Gaudette earned his way onto the team in the preseason, so did Baertschi. If this is a meritocracy, Baertschi should be on the Canucks to start the season. He didn’t treat his position on the team as a given, the way some veterans do in the preseason, and put up four points in five games.

What’s particularly infuriating about Baertschi being waived is the players that remain on the roster in his stead: Tyler Motte, Tim Schaller, and Loui Eriksson, among others.

The counter argument is that Motte, Schaller, and Eriksson don’t play the same game as Baertschi. They’re bottom-six forwards that player on the penalty kill, while Baertschi has to be in the top-six to be in the lineup.

Ignoring for the moment that Baertschi absolutely should be in the top-six — he’s out-performed Tanner Pearson, at the very least — this betrays an outdated mentality of how to construct an NHL roster. The best teams around the NHL don’t have a clearly-defined top-six/bottom-six, but instead focus on getting offence throughout their lineup. At the very least, they have a top-nine that is expected to score, perhaps with a more defence-oriented fourth line.

Jim Benning has talked a lot about top-nine forwards and having three scoring lines, but waiving Baertschi (and Goldobin, for that matter) is a sign that they can’t escape the top-six/bottom-six dichotomy. Part of that is personnel: when your third and fourth-line centres are Brandon Sutter and Jay Beagle, it’s awfully hard to create a third line that can score, let alone a fourth line.

Of course, with the Canucks seemingly keeping up Gaudette, perhaps they do want to make a more offence-oriented third line, perhaps with Sutter moving to the wing with Beagle. If that’s the plan, why waive Baertschi, who showed so much chemistry with Gaudette in the preseason?

Some might ask, who will play the penalty kill if you waive the bottom-six forwards? But the Canucks have plenty of players that can become penalty killers. A lot of teams around the NHL have their best players on the penalty kill, like Mitch Marner in Toronto or Patrice Bergeron in Boston. Why can’t Bo Horvat play on the penalty kill or J.T. Miller? Jake Virtanen, Micheal Ferland, and Tanner Pearson could be on the penalty kill, or even Elias Pettersson. If people are going to compare Pettersson to Pavel Datsyuk, then why not take advantage of his complete, all-around game?

Even if Baertschi slips through waivers, which is always a possibility at this time of year when teams are looking to subtract rather than add players, the team will be worse on opening night without him on the roster. Of course, the Canucks may be hoping that someone claims him in order to clear some more cap space. That’s been the theory of many Canucks fans on social media.

The issue is that the Canucks aren’t in a cap crunch that would necessitate clearing Baertschi’s $3.37 million cap hit. Since Brock Boeser took a cheaper bridge deal, the Canucks could easily get under the salary cap by sending down lesser players and papering down a player like Gaudette or Quinn Hughes to get Antoine Roussel on the roster before putting him on the Long-Term Injured Reserve. If the salary cap was the reason for waiving Baertschi, then the move makes even less sense.

Perhaps the Canucks were worried about Baertschi’s injury history — he’s now had a couple serious concussions — but that would be all the more reason to employ proper asset management to keep Baertschi in the lineup and send down Gaudette, thereby insuring yourselves for when someone inevitably gets hurt. Instead, the Canucks are risking losing a legitimate top-six NHL forward for no reason.

Simply put, it’s nonsensical for a team that has so much trouble scoring goals to waive a player like Baertschi.

It’s hard to spare any outrage for the waiving of Nikolay Goldobin after spending it all on Baertschi, but it’s still frustrating to see a team in need of scoring and creative playmaking be so dismissive of Goldobin. That said, while Goldobin worked hard in the preseason and you could see his attention to detail away from the puck, he just didn’t do enough offensively in the Canucks’ eyes to justify keeping him in the lineup.

Sure, the Canucks certainly could have kept him on the roster by sending down some combination of Schaller, Motte, and Eriksson, but if they weren’t going to do that to keep Baertschi on the roster, they certainly weren’t going to do it for Goldobin.

Given the talented players currently on the waiver wire, the chance that Goldobin gets claimed is a lot slimmer than it is for Baertschi. Goldobin has dominated at the AHL level — he had 31 points in 30 games the last time he was with the Utica Comets — and he’ll likely dominate again. It wouldn’t be surprising to see him back with the Canucks before the season is done.

Finally, there’s Alex Biega, who is a surprise to see on waivers. Biega has been a solid seventh defenceman for the Canucks over the last few seasons, stepping onto the ice and making an impact even after long stints in the press box.

Waiving Biega means the Canucks are going with 14 forwards and 7 defencemen for the time being, which is unusual for a Travis Green-coached club. They tend to like having 8 defencemen, with a balance of left and right-handed shots, in case of injury, but they do have a couple versatile defencemen that can play either side in Jordie Benn and Quinn Hughes.

This also suggests that Oscar Fantenberg is back to full health after taking a tough hit and going into the concussion protocol last week. Whether Fantenberg is better than Biega is another question. Fantenberg is arguably more reliable defensively, but doesn’t move the puck up ice anywhere near as well as Biega.

It’s a tough blow to take for Biega, who has worked hard to earn more minutes with the Canucks and never once complained about his position in the pressbox. The Canucks might miss his veteran presence off the ice as well.

At the same time, it’s understandable to see Biega cut. He’s been on the bubble for most of his career. You can bet he’ll work twice as hard to earn his way back up to the NHL.

 

 

For the record, I also disagree with the waiving of Biega over Fantenberg.

[Gaudette Celly]

1 minute ago, FlyLow_ said:

PK did just fine when Schaller was in the press box all season last year.

Taking Granlund's spot, presumably.  Another example of improving team size and grit.

 

Schaller > Granlund

Ferlund > Baertschi

Miller > Goldobin

Benn > Hutton

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

I wish I could justify creating a new thread, because other than their comments on Goldobin PITB here perfectly encapsulates my feelings on this issue:

 

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/canucks-camp-cuts-sven-baertschi-nikolay-goldobin-and-alex-biega-put-on-waivers-1.23962094

 

 

 

 

For the record, I also disagree with the waiving of Biega over Fantenberg.

I'm really hopeful that JB has a confirmation from a GM that they will claim Baer, but just didn't want to make a trade for him.  I like Baer, and he should be in the NHL.  

 

[JeremyCuddles]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

As ON was kind enough to point out below, Roussel also did that 38.5% ozone starts in a hard minute, match up role. Baer would be expected to match that production in the bottom 6, in a similar role (vs his cushier, top 6 with 64.8% ozone starts that he enjoyed last year).

 

So Baer at 0.54PPG in a cushy top 6 role vs Roussel at 0.48PPG in a much harder match up (and PK) role. I know who I'm picking for the bottom 6 role. Seems the team does too.

 

 

See above.

And he could continue to do that in a 4th line role. And I think to expect Roussel to continue putting up 30-40+ point totals seems a bit wishful. I agree, hoping Baer stays healthy is also wishful, even more so, but I'd rather have both of them in my bottom 6 rather than Roussel and Schaller. I dunno why it has to be one or the other. Bottom 6 has 2 LW spots. Roussel can bolster our 4th line and Baer can bolster our 3rd. Hell, we can even find that Baer ends up being a better fit in the top 6 if Pearson or Ferland fail to click with their respective linemates. I just think it was premature to send down Baer but I guess it's better to waive him now rather than when Roussel is healthy.

[oldnews]

7 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I guess as a winger as well he could occasionally be put up into the top 6 during games where Green is shaking things up. 

yeah - if Boeser weren't ready I think he'd make a good candidate to move up the lineup - he's not only highly skilled, but there are less right handed winger options.

[Mike Vanderhoek]

Cehlarik looks good, good on Boston if they sneak him through.

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Only on the offensive side of the game - imo the defensive side of the game is what will dictate Gaudette being a winger - which does not stop Gaudette from being creative, producing - if anything, it could free him up to be moreso playing wing, where he won't be engaged in those down low dzone battles - that will be Sutter's duty.  I also think it would be very surprising if Gaudette could improve enough in the faceoff circle to compete with Sutter in that sense, this soon (I'm very doubtful in that respect).  I think it makes more sense to leave Sutter where he is best, and let Gaudette develop without the pressure of 'bottom six' defensive center responsibilities.....And additionally, I don't share the mindset of folks who assume Gaudette is earmarked to be a 3C - who knows - he could exceed that potential as an upside winger.

People want a 3rd line that can score...an eventual Roussel, Sutter, Gaudette/Virtanen/Leivo line looks pretty darn good to me. All while being able to also play in their own end (and be a giant PITA for the opposition).

[oldnews]

7 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I wish I could justify creating a new thread, because other than their comments on Goldobin PITB here perfectly encapsulates my feelings on this issue:

 

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/canucks-camp-cuts-sven-baertschi-nikolay-goldobin-and-alex-biega-put-on-waivers-1.23962094

 

 

For the record, I also disagree with the waiving of Biega over Fantenberg.

I think it's just plain dumb of them to try to lump Motte in with Eriksson and Schaller - wadr, that's just dumb. 

I get it - these smarmy types don't value players like Motte (or Beagle et al for that matter) - but suggesting Motte should be in the waiver club alongside these other guys is a complete whiff imo.

[TheRick]

Is Edmonton going to accommodate Sam Gagner and loan him to Toronto or are they gonna be classless and send him down to OKC?

[mll]

24 minutes ago, FaninMex said:

According to last year, Beagle and Schaller make an effective 4th line combo. Both their numbers go up when paired together.

The Canucks apparently did not do particularly well last season compared to the rest of the league when their top 2 Cs were not on the ice.  

 

This chart was again posted by Thomas Drance.  They call it a proxy of bottom-6 scoring.  They take goals for and against and remove the numbers of the two most used Cs on each team.  On the Canucks it would be without Pettersson and Horvat.  It's in per 60 so actual counts might not be as ugly.

 

An observation to the chart was: "Offensively, it isn’t a shock that their two checking lines were bottom-five in the league for goals-for per 60. But the real issue is that they compounded their scoring woes by allowing 2.71 goals-against per 60; only Ottawa, Florida, Philadelphia and New Jersey leaked goals at a worse rate."

 

The article goes in detail with graphs and numbers to show that it's not just actual numbers but also expected numbers that aren't particularly pretty.  

 

Sutter only played 26 games last season so he should help improve those numbers, although last season he was not as solid as in the past but he might have been playing through injury.  Gaudette was a rookie trying to find his footing.  So that explains part of the struggles and it should be better this season.  

 

They are using that chart to argue that the Canucks roster construction is outdated with teams moving to 3 scoring lines.  Most teams talk of how the best way to defend is to play in the offensive zone but you need to be able to make plays and maintain possession to force the other team to defend.

 

[Bure_Pavel]

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

As ON was kind enough to point out below, Roussel also did that 38.5% ozone starts in a hard minute, match up role. Baer would be expected to match that production in the bottom 6, in a similar role (vs his cushier, top 6 with 64.8% ozone starts that he enjoyed last year).

 

So Baer at 0.54PPG in a cushy top 6 role vs Roussel at 0.48PPG in a much harder match up (and PK) role. I know who I'm picking for the bottom 6 role. Seems the team does too.

 

 

See above.

They should have waited until Roussel was ready to return. Baertchi can help with secondary scoring until then and even help the powerplay. 

[FaninMex]

1 minute ago, mll said:

The Canucks apparently did not do particularly well last season compared to the rest of the league when their top 2 Cs were not on the ice.  

 

This chart was again posted by Thomas Drance.  They call it a proxy of bottom-6 scoring.  They take goals for and against and remove the numbers of the two most used Cs on each team.  On the Canucks it would be without Pettersson and Horvat.  It's in per 60 so actual counts might not be as ugly.

 

An observation to the chart was: "Offensively, it isn’t a shock that their two checking lines were bottom-five in the league for goals-for per 60. But the real issue is that they compounded their scoring woes by allowing 2.71 goals-against per 60; only Ottawa, Florida, Philadelphia and New Jersey leaked goals at a worse rate."

 

The article goes in detail with graphs and numbers to show that it's not just actual numbers but also expected numbers that aren't particularly pretty.  

 

Sutter only played 26 games last season so he should help improve those numbers, although last season he was not as solid as in the past but he might have been playing through injury.  Gaudette was a rookie trying to find his footing.  So that explains part of the struggles and it should be better this season.  

 

They are using that chart to argue that the Canucks roster construction is outdated with teams moving to 3 scoring lines.  Most teams talk of how the best way to defend is to play in the offensive zone but you need to be able to make plays and maintain possession to force the other team to defend.

 

Schaller was only up near the end of the season not all season. So overall states for the whole season do not paint the appropriate picture.

[Alflives]

Just now, Bure_Pavel said:

They should have waited until Roussel was ready to return. Baertchi can help with secondary scoring until then and even help the powerplay. 

Baer, hopefully, will not get claimed.  However, why take the risk, when we know there is no way LE gets claimed, right?  Loui is sitting in the press box anyway.  Baer could just as well sit in the press box.  

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, mll said:

The Canucks apparently did not do particularly well last season compared to the rest of the league when their top 2 Cs were not on the ice.  

 

This chart was again posted by Thomas Drance.  They call it a proxy of bottom-6 scoring.  They take goals for and against and remove the numbers of the two most used Cs on each team.  On the Canucks it would be without Pettersson and Horvat.  It's in per 60 so actual counts might not be as ugly.

 

An observation to the chart was: "Offensively, it isn’t a shock that their two checking lines were bottom-five in the league for goals-for per 60. But the real issue is that they compounded their scoring woes by allowing 2.71 goals-against per 60; only Ottawa, Florida, Philadelphia and New Jersey leaked goals at a worse rate."

 

The article goes in detail with graphs and numbers to show that it's not just actual numbers but also expected numbers that aren't particularly pretty.  

 

Sutter only played 26 games last season so he should help improve those numbers, although last season he was not as solid as in the past but he might have been playing through injury.  Gaudette was a rookie trying to find his footing.  So that explains part of the struggles and it should be better this season.  

 

They are using that chart to argue that the Canucks roster construction is outdated with teams moving to 3 scoring lines.  Most teams talk of how the best way to defend is to play in the offensive zone but you need to be able to make plays and maintain possession to force the other team to defend.

 

So does blue indicate 1st round exit?