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

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


Ossi Vaananen

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, oldnews said:

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.

How to value players is inherently controversial in my opinion.  It's easy to value the star players -- Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and maybe Miller.  The likes of Ferland seem pretty valuable too.  After that?  What makes a good player?  You can't win unless you score, and you can't win unless you score more than the other team.  Again obvious. 

But how do you value Baertschi vs. Pearson, or Hutton vs. Benn.    In our case, it is very difficult to figure out why Schaller is on this team to start when Baertschi isn't. Or why Motte seems to have settled into a cushy spot when Goldobin is once again in the AHL.  If the objective is to score more goals than the other team, then we are making some really strange choices right now.  Eriksson in particular has no place on this team -- watch the interview where Benning talks about the third line where he adds in Eriksson as an afterthought when he has already praised the 3 other players who are already on that line.  Our team has decided to keep a guy like Schaller over Baertschi -- one gets points on a regular basis and can be great in overtime/play the pp.  The other guy spent most of last year invisible or in the pressbox.  

 

The only way the Baertschi thing makes sense is if they are giving him a chance to get back into shape and work his way back into the top 6 or top 9.  Gambling that they can get him safely through waivers to Utica and then figure out his health and viability.  I doubt very much that Pearson is going to be a top 9 guy in the same class as Baertschi.  Either they think Pearson really is better than Baertschi or they are hoping to keep Baertschi in the minors until Pearson flops or there is another injury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, mll said:

Benning insists that it was not a cap move.  It was simply having better players than Baertschi.

 

  

Thats such a load though. Not a chance that Tim freaking Schaller is better than Baer, not to mention Leivo or Motte.

 

It really concerns me that If we were comfortable waiving Baer then rolling 3-4 lines like the rest of the contending nhl teams have been isn't on our agenda, and that was half the reason people were finally excited about the team this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like baer , but i trust benning/ and green on there decisions, they were evaluating everyone in camp ....they have the GM and coaching jobs not us.

 

So i love all the rage people are showing in this thread, if its ment to be, than its ment to be rofl .

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said:

I like baer , but i trust benning/ and green on there decisions, they were evaluating everyone in camp ....they have the GM and coaching jobs not us.

 

So i love all the rage people are showing in this thread, if its ment to be, than its ment to be rofl .

lmao. Trust the GM and coach for acing us the best team on the ice. You know how sarcastic that sounds when you put some facts on it? Fyi, for the past 5 years our team had always finished at the bottom of the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, LarsEller said:

Thats such a load though. Not a chance that Tim freaking Schaller is better than Baer, not to mention Leivo or Motte.

 

It really concerns me that If we were comfortable waiving Baer then rolling 3-4 lines like the rest of the contending nhl teams have been isn't on our agenda, and that was half the reason people were finally excited about the team this year. 

I understand what they are trying to do with Baertchi, yes he's injury prone and probably one hit away from retiring, and hes attractive enough that someone MIGHT pick him up and take away his 3 million whatever salary from our laps. I get that.

 

What I don't get that its SCHALLER is the guy that replaces his spot. Schaller is a nobody, and contributes F-all to this team. He's worst than Granlund. Even Goldobin, yes he he didn't have a superb training camp, but you're replacing Schaller over Goldy or Baertchi? Doesn't make sense in my opinion. Goldobin can at least chip in offensively and has upside, Baertchi can put up more points in half a season blindfolded, both are better options that Schaller or Ericsson for that matter. If you were to gauge who had the worst training camp of them all based on merit, it would be Louie Ericsson. He scored that one goal and thats about it, didn't look like a guy that didn't want to give an effort and sure ass hell didn't look like a guy that wanted to be here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Drakrami said:

So they reward Gaudette by benching his preseason linemate who helped make it happen. Why couldn't they bench floaters like Eriksson, Schaller? Baertschi > Pearson or Virtanen

Yeah I didn't understand that too... Gauds and Baertchi looked liked they were really clicking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Baggins said:

It wasn't those guys that stole Baer's spot..... it was Gaudette, who I honestly believed all summer would be in Utica to start the year. But that was before his preseason performance.

Schaller offers nothing to the team, and Ericsson doesn't like his role, and is not fond of the coach. Baertchi can put up more points in half a season that those 2 clowns and say what you want about Goldobin, at least he wanted to be here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grape said:

There's 2 counterpoints to this

 

1. That's what I mean when I say that this type of move is "archaic." Obviously I don't literally mean archaic, but you're not going to find many examples from the modern day of teams doing so. In the past, yes, it's how teams wanted to play, with grinders and tough guys and penalty killer scattered throughout the bottom 2 lines. But it's much more progressive to have your best 12 forwards or close to your best 12 forwards in the lineup nowadays.

 

This is especially true for the 3rd line. Not many third lines have limited skill or offense in the NHL nowadays. The Canucks have chosen to do the opposite, even given the fact that this team has been offensively challenged in the past. Without Baer, our best offensive/skill players outside of our top 6 are: Gaudette? Roussel? Sutter? This is not a recipe for success today in the NHL. What bothers me the most is that JB believes that we have enough skill on the team, which confirms that he doesn't think much skill is needed to play on the 3rd line. 

 

2. Your example specifically mentions Yzerman as being too one dimensional. The players that made the team over him are not checking line guys like Tim Schaller. Instead they were still very deserving of being on the team, as by a quick look at the roster, basically every forward was above PPG or near PPG. In that case, Yzerman was literally deemed to be not as good as the other players due to his defensive deficiencies while the others could put up points and defend.

 

I don't think at all that this is the case with Baertschi vs Schaller. There is no way that Baertschi's defensive deficiencies make him a less valuable player than Schaller. In fact, you already have guys like Miller, Eriksson, Beagle, Ferland, Horvat, Motte, Sutter etc... who can kill penalties, so there's no way Schaller is even close to being as valuable as Baertschi is.  

I think jb wants skill across the board but comes down to defensive skill, pk, pp, 5v5 play, strong corner/net presence, hits, passing ability ect... skill is more then what you can do on the puck. 3rd liners for a contender need skill but need toughness and defense as well. imo baer is 1.5/3 on that. which isn't good enough. is he good enough for top6 when healthy. yes but he isn't pencil in as that so he was the one to go.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said:

I like baer , but i trust benning/ and green on there decisions, they were evaluating everyone in camp ....they have the GM and coaching jobs not us.

 

So i love all the rage people are showing in this thread, if its ment to be, than its ment to be rofl .

Benning has been trying to move Baertschi in the summer already.   They had already decided their top-6.  Both Green and Benning during the summer talked of the Pearson-Horvat chemistry and how Miller/Ferland were brought in to complete the top-6.

 

Baertschi was not even at media day unlike all the other vets and key players.  At camp he got the Vey/Gaunce treatment starting with Focht as his C.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

only yhting i can say is Sven might have seen his  last days as a Nuck

 

usually GM's waive players then trade them or if no other team wants him, and he has been out played he gets stuck in the minors

 

hope he gets traded with another to round out our D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not posting on here often but this decision and the Benning interview made me..

I am actually a huge GMJB supporter but waiving Baertschi??AND keeping both Schaller and Eriksson???

There have been 2 moves that Benning made so far which made me rage:

1. The Kassian trade 

2. The Lack trade (even though it was a very good move, I know that, I was just in love with Eddie haha)

And now putting Baertschi on waivers.. the good thing is all of these moves are minor moves and he has

done so well apart from that, so Im still a huge supporter.

 

Here is why it was a bad move: 

Sven would have given our Lineup much more flexibility and a 3rd line that can actually score. Plus Sven 

was one of our best Powerplay guys ever since he joined the Canucks and now Benning is saying there

is no spot on the PP for him? That is actually ridiculous, he is the perfect 3rd liner PP specialist in my opinion.

Also it appears that Gaudette will stay up and we could have had these 3rd lines:

Baertschi -  Gaudette - Leivo strong offense but maybe a bit weak on D but not a liability, they would outscore their opponents

Baertschi - Gaudette - Virtanen same

Baertschi -  Sutter - Gaudette more balanced and still strong offense if Sutter doesn't suck all of it out

Also as mentioned before we could match up by switching Sven and Pearson to make the 3rd line more stable while still

maintaining a great second line with Baertschi, Horvat, Miller.

 

The reasons so far are based on talent, now lets have a look at value comparing him to the other waiver candidates:

Horvat, Pettersson, Miller, Ferland, Boeser, Pearson, Roussel we don't need to talk about. Sutter is also valuable to us.

- Virtanen is still young and has a lot of upside even though he gets me frustrated at times. He's a keeper for this year for

sure but if there is no improvement and he comes out of shape to the next camp, then I think he has to go too unless he's

a 20+ goal scorer. He would get picked up 100% though this year so we simply cannot afford to put him on waivers.

- Leivo I like him and he deserves to stay up but the only edge he has on Sven is health. Leivo would get claimed 100% too

- Beagle I think we need him but honestly he is expendable in my eyes.. he is an older, slightly worse version of Sutter and we

have Gaudette.. its definetly getting tight for either Sutter or Beagle but they are both still needed this year but next year I hope

we move on from Beagle. Also no one would claim him at his current age and contract?!

- Motte no way I would waive Motte! He brings it every night, he is a perfect 4th liner on a low cap, is still young and might even

improve on the offensive end, can kill penalties. Also he is a role model for putting in all your effort. To all the People who want

him on waivers, just watch him play and you know why he's a lock on our 4th line and PK.

- Eriksson ... man oh man.. I would have given him a chance if he came to camp, show that he wants to be here, put in at least 

50% of Motte's effort but he didn't. So let him rott in the press box and then waive him once Roussel is back? If thats the plan

for Loui then Im ok with it but I can't stand him on the team anymore. Not to mention he would have never ever been claimed which

sucks in this case. And if you want a 4th line player then call up MacEwen and send him down once Roussel is back. But most likely

losing Baertschi if it would be so easy to avoid sucks..

- Schaller he is basically as useless as Eriksson but his cap is less than a third and he definitely deserves another chance over 

Eriksson. I could at least see him as a somehow useful 4th liner if he could get some chemistry but his time with us will be 

limited as we have a lot of better options for that spot. Also no one would claim him, so again bad asset managment, you have 

to waive at least one guy who doesn't get claimed for sure and could be called up instead of risking to lose both Baertschi and

Goldobin..

Also not happy about Biega being waived.. really hope he clears, he's the perfect 7-8 Dman who can overperform for a couple

of games and even score some goals here and there. Not to mention great attitude. I don't know anything about Fantenberg but

I know Biega and thats reason enough for me to keep him. Hope Fantenberg proves me wrong. And yes Goldobin, he has more

value than some of the players we didn't waive but there was no other choice here. It was do or die for him last year and he failed,

there is just no room for him at all. If he clears and plays 20+ minutes in the AHL, getting confidence and scoring a lot then maybe maybe

he might get one last chance when injuries happen. Or at least his trade value might go up a bit once he cleared.

 

All of this and especially what JB is saying in the interview makes no sense to me ("we have better players" - no we don't!)

It actually makes me think that Baertschi maybe wants to go on IR for the rest of his contract and then retire and therefore

Benning puts him on waivers so that Aquaman doesn't have to keep paying him... like think about it there was no word of

concussion issues or whatsoever. If I would be the GM and would want to keep Sven (even if its in the Minors) I would say

that putting him on waivers is health related and then hope other Gms stay away. Maybe its also for the cap but they really

wanna get rid of him..

 

I am not concerned about Benning at all but I am starting to get concerned about Green. If we are playing .500 hockey or 

below after 25-35 games I want him gone and see what an experienced coach could do with this team. I really dislike this

top 6 bottom 6 idea. There should be a top 9 plus a matchup shutdown 4th line (like the Sutter Dorsett line which I think was 

pretty effective) .. we could do Motte - Beagle - Sutter or Roussel - Sutter - Motte. 

 

Lineup that I wanted:

Ferland - Pettersson - Boeser

Pearson - Horvat - Miller

Motte - Beagle - Sutter (shutdown line) Roussel - Sutter - Motte once Roussel is back

Baertschi - Gaudette - Virtanen/Leivo (more ozone starts and sheltered minutes)

Leivo/Virtanen Beagle (Schaller until Roussel is back then waive him)

 

Edler - Stecher

Hughes - Myers

Benn - Tanev (hopefully keeps Tanev more healthy and he could take some of Stechers shifts if we need to protect a lead)

Biega

 

Waive: Eriksson, Goldobin, Fantenberg

 

Lineup with available players now:

Ferland - Pettersson - Boeser

Pearson - Horvat - Miller

Leivo - Gaudette - Sutter (Sutter takes the Faceoffs)

Motte - Beagle - Virtanen 

Schaller Eriksson

(Leivo, Virtanen or Beagle out when Roussel is back depending on performance)

 

D same except Fantenberg for Biega..

 

I really like the first Lineup much more than the second one..

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

3 hours ago, Grape said:

Man I don't understand... I mean it's not like this move will drop us significantly in the standings or make us definitively worse off... 

 

But it's just the ideology that our GM would rather have guys like Schaller and even Eriksson over Baertschi just because they're "better fits." You've gotta keep your best 12-14 forwards in the modern NHL, or close to that. Baertschi is unquestionably one of them.

 

I don't like the fact that we will willingly cut skilled players just because our top 6 is set and they don't "fit" on the 3rd or 4th line because of their play style. With this ideology, you're handicapping yourself to only 2 scoring lines at all times when the elite teams have 3 or 4 lines that can score, because apparently any skilled player on the 3rd line is worthy of getting cut for someone like Schaller or Eriksson. If this is the idea going forward I don't think our offensive struggles will improve unless our elite guys start seriously dominating

If anyone runs Petey, I would rather have Schaller go over and do a number on the guy than Sven.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, smokes said:

If anyone runs Petey, I would rather have Schaller go over and do a number on the guy than Sven.

So are we supposed to have 11 grinders at forward to protect Petey? He’s 20 he can handle himself. Ferland is on his line he’s a tough customer to help him out. We got Benn and Miller who don’t shy away from physical play. If anything Schaller is redundant and doesn’t contribute any offence. I look at every team who’s won the cup the last few years they all had solid depth goal scoring. I don’t think schaller is going to provide any offence.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LarsEller said:

Thats such a load though. Not a chance that Tim freaking Schaller is better than Baer, not to mention Leivo or Motte.

 

It really concerns me that If we were comfortable waiving Baer then rolling 3-4 lines like the rest of the contending nhl teams have been isn't on our agenda, and that was half the reason people were finally excited about the team this year. 

Schaller is a placeholder until Roussel is healthy. He'll be joining Sven soon enough.

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

sounds like utica is the place to watch hockey..they may have a better team in utica...more toughness anyways...we will see ..time will tell....like ive said canucks need character guys...they a few..peterson  brock when he wants to and ferland and rouselll...thats about it...bo is just a hard nose player ..but ya too weak in my view this line up...pick up brandon manning maybe

  • Wat 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, HKSR said:

Honestly, the power play looks a lot better with Baertschi on it than without him.  He somehow finds a way to be open in the middle of the ice.

100% agree.  Baer is potentially as good as Eriksson was prior to signing his big money deal.  The only caveat is whether he can stay healthy.  

 

This move reeks of the same organizational thought pattern when GMMG did not resign Mitchell.  

 

Both good players that had concussion issues that the nucks just let go of.  

 

You telling me JB couldn't get a 4th rounder for Baer?  

 

Is anyone on this board going to say Schaller is a better player or preformed better in preseason?  

 

We couldn't look to move someone or a lower value package (Schaller and Baer) to add a gritty 4th liner with some aggression issues?  

 

Just bafflegabbed that Eriksson and Schaller made the cut and Biega and Baer were waived.  

 

Don't see the 3 dimensional chess strategy in this move, not at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Phat Fingers said:

100% agree.  Baer is potentially as good as Eriksson was prior to signing his big money deal.  The only caveat is whether he can stay healthy.  

 

This move reeks of the same organizational thought pattern when GMMG did not resign Mitchell.  

 

Both good players that had concussion issues that the nucks just let go of.  

 

You telling me JB couldn't get a 4th rounder for Baer?  

 

Is anyone on this board going to say Schaller is a better player or preformed better in preseason?  

 

We couldn't look to move someone or a lower value package (Schaller and Baer) to add a gritty 4th liner with some aggression issues?  

 

Just bafflegabbed that Eriksson and Schaller made the cut and Biega and Baer were waived.  

 

Don't see the 3 dimensional chess strategy in this move, not at all.  

FIrst off, who cares about Biega. Second, if Baerstchi doesn't get picked up you know that there was no market for him. If he does get picked up then I agree that he should have been traded for at least something.

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...