Sign in to follow this  
Hindustan Smyl

[Discussion] The Canucks should consider trading one of their forwards for a defenseman.

Recommended Posts

The Canucks should consider trading one of their forwards for a defenseman.  
 

I am extremely impressed with the following:

 

1) Our goaltending depth:  Elite prospect Demko backing up elite goalie Markstrom.

 

2) Our depth up front:   Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin can easily slot into the Top 6 if we get injuries up front.   The presence of both Gaudette and Sutter within our organization ensures that we have enough centermen in case of injuries.   Motte and Roussel give us depth on the bottom 6.
 

So - in net and up front, I think the Canucks are light years ahead of where they once were.

 

Our lack of depth on defense is still a concern to me.

 

While the Canucks defense as a whole is vastly improved, the unfortunate truth of the matter is that

 

1) Edler, Tanev, and Myers are still injury prone D men.  

2) While Benn and Stecher are significant upgrades over Pouliot, Gudbranson, Del Zotto, etc., they are still not top 4 calibre defensemen.  
 

If the Canucks are going to take the next step, I think they’ll need atleast one more dman that can play Top 4 Incase of injuries.....one that not only can “fill in” there, but actually be pretty decent.
 

For example - maybe a dman that is slightly better than both Stecher and Benn......which would then make Stecher our #7.

 

I know that would be unfair to Stecher given the years of service that he’s provided us, but Stecher being our #7 really would signify that this team is deep defensively.   
 

Think back to that 2011 team.   Keith friggin Ballard was our extra.....and he was good enough to NOT look out of place on a top 4.  That’s the kind of depth that I’m talking about. You had Edler, Erhoff, Salo, Bieksa, and Hamhuis.  
 

The current Canucks need one more “good” defenseman to really put themselves on the map in my opinion.    
 

Can someone like Juolevi develop into that guy sooner than later?   Time will tell.    
 

I don’t know which current Canuck has the equivalent value of what I’m looking for (ie someone that is better than Stecher and Benn, but not as good as Edler, Tanev, Hughes, and Myers), but THAT is the forward that I’d look at trading.  
 

Does Virtanen get a defenseman with the above description?

 

 

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

The Canucks should consider trading one of their forwards for a defenseman.  
 

I am extremely impressed with the following:

 

1) Our goaltending depth:  Elite prospect Demko backing up elite goalie Markstrom.

 

2) Our depth up front:   Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin can easily slot into the Top 6 if we get injuries up front.   The presence of both Gaudette and Sutter within our organization ensures that we have enough centermen in case of injuries.   Motte and Roussel give us depth on the bottom 6.
 

So - in net and up front, I think the Canucks are light years ahead of where they once were.

 

Our lack of depth on defense is still a concern to me.

 

While the Canucks defense as a whole is vastly improved, the unfortunate truth of the matter is that

 

1) Edler, Tanev, and Myers are still injury prone D men.  

2) While Benn and Stecher are significant upgrades over Pouliot, Gudbranson, Del Zotto, etc., they are still not top 4 calibre defensemen.  
 

If the Canucks are going to take the next step, I think they’ll need atleast one more dman that can play Top 4 Incase of injuries.....one that not only can “fill in” there, but actually be pretty decent.
 

For example - maybe a dman that is slightly better than both Stecher and Benn......which would then make Stecher our #7.

 

I know that would be unfair to Stecher given the years of service that he’s provided us, but Stecher being our #7 really would signify that this team is deep defensively.   
 

Think back to that 2011 team.   Keith friggin Ballard was our extra.....and he was good enough to NOT look out of place on a top 4.  That’s the kind of depth that I’m talking about. You had Edler, Erhoff, Salo, Bieksa, and Hamhuis.  
 

The current Canucks need one more “good” defenseman to really put themselves on the map in my opinion.    
 

Can someone like Juolevi develop into that guy sooner than later?   Time will tell.    
 

I don’t know which current Canuck has the equivalent value of what I’m looking for (ie someone that is better than Stecher and Benn, but not as good as Edler, Tanev, Hughes, and Myers), but THAT is the forward that I’d look at trading.  
 

Does Virtanen get a defenseman with the above description?

 

 

Sorry, 

 

I should probably say one thing here:

 

My post appears to be a little too antagonistic for Stecher and I feel that I should clarify:

 

Guys like Stecher, Benn, and Hutton are guys that can fill in on the 2nd pairing, but aren’t guys that should be on your top 4 for a extended period of time.   That’s the point that I was trying to make.   
 

The Canucks should bring in a guy that fits that bill.   Will Juolevi be that guy?  If so - when?    Is Tryamkin still in the mix?   If so - is he that guy?    Does trading Virtanen get you that type of guy?

 

All I know is that the Canucks could use a little more depth on D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, N7Nucks said:

Our D depth is good enough Benning traded a depth d-man for a guy not even good enough to be a regular in the AHL at 24. I think our defence is okay. Besides. Neither Benn or Stecher are in the top 4. They can, and likely will only be asked to, play in the top 4 temporarily due to injuries. 

Your last point hit the nail on the head with regard to what I’m referring to.

 

Will Benn and Stecher be used *temporarily* on the Top 4 when you consider the injury histories of Edler, Tanev, and Myers?    I would argue that Benn and Stecher could be seeing a LOT of Top 4 duty at some point this season given the injury history of the aforementioned three players.     
 

Now obviously - injuries happen and are inevitable, but I think it might beehove the Canucks to bring in more QUALITY dman......especially when you consider that we now have more than enough depth to insure ourselves from injuries up front.    
 

Having said all that however, I guess it just depends.    Can someone like Juolevi or Brisebois step up big time If either guy gets called up?   If we’re thinking more long term, would a guy like Tryamkin be the perfect solution to my problem described above?    Perhaps it’s not worth making a move?    Who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

The Canucks should consider trading one of their forwards for a defenseman.  
 

I am extremely impressed with the following:

 

1) Our goaltending depth:  Elite prospect Demko backing up elite goalie Markstrom.

 

2) Our depth up front:   Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin can easily slot into the Top 6 if we get injuries up front.   The presence of both Gaudette and Sutter within our organization ensures that we have enough centermen in case of injuries.   Motte and Roussel give us depth on the bottom 6.
 

So - in net and up front, I think the Canucks are light years ahead of where they once were.

 

Our lack of depth on defense is still a concern to me.

 

While the Canucks defense as a whole is vastly improved, the unfortunate truth of the matter is that

 

1) Edler, Tanev, and Myers are still injury prone D men.  

2) While Benn and Stecher are significant upgrades over Pouliot, Gudbranson, Del Zotto, etc., they are still not top 4 calibre defensemen.  
 

If the Canucks are going to take the next step, I think they’ll need atleast one more dman that can play Top 4 Incase of injuries.....one that not only can “fill in” there, but actually be pretty decent.
 

For example - maybe a dman that is slightly better than both Stecher and Benn......which would then make Stecher our #7.

 

I know that would be unfair to Stecher given the years of service that he’s provided us, but Stecher being our #7 really would signify that this team is deep defensively.   
 

Think back to that 2011 team.   Keith friggin Ballard was our extra.....and he was good enough to NOT look out of place on a top 4.  That’s the kind of depth that I’m talking about. You had Edler, Erhoff, Salo, Bieksa, and Hamhuis.  
 

The current Canucks need one more “good” defenseman to really put themselves on the map in my opinion.    
 

Can someone like Juolevi develop into that guy sooner than later?   Time will tell.    
 

I don’t know which current Canuck has the equivalent value of what I’m looking for (ie someone that is better than Stecher and Benn, but not as good as Edler, Tanev, Hughes, and Myers), but THAT is the forward that I’d look at trading.  
 

Does Virtanen get a defenseman with the above description?

 

 

Hughes is performing quite nicely, so there is depth there.

 

Do you have a particular forward(s) in mind that you'd trade?

And do you have a potential defenseman target to trade them for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Guys like Stecher, Benn, and Hutton are guys that can fill in on the 2nd pairing, but aren’t guys that should be on your top 4 for a extended period of time.   That’s the point that I was trying to make.   

That's the same for any team and the reality of the cap.  It's typically unaffordable having top-4 quality playing on the bottom pairing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is some congestion with the forwards, but a nice problem to have. I think there might be some extra D help coming down the stetch (Tryamkin and Juolevi), so no need to be concerned yet.

 

My one concern is the goaltending actually. I like Markstrom and Demko, but are they the tandem that's going to carry the Canucks to a Cup? Do they have what it takes? I find with Marklstrom, he's got a temper. If he gets aggitated and frustrated, his game will sufffer. He's got to temper his emotions (getting upset after allowing a bad goal) Demko is still learning too. He might be great one day, but he isn't there yet. So, is this the tandem that's going to get them back to the SCF? Not sure, and I'm almost certain DiPietro isn't the guy either. Guess we'll see how the current duo does with better competition coming up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Your last point hit the nail on the head with regard to what I’m referring to.

 

Will Benn and Stecher be used *temporarily* on the Top 4 when you consider the injury histories of Edler, Tanev, and Myers?    I would argue that Benn and Stecher could be seeing a LOT of Top 4 duty at some point this season given the injury history of the aforementioned three players.     
 

Now obviously - injuries happen and are inevitable, but I think it might beehove the Canucks to bring in more QUALITY dman......especially when you consider that we now have more than enough depth to insure ourselves from injuries up front.    
 

Having said all that however, I guess it just depends.    Can someone like Juolevi or Brisebois step up big time If either guy gets called up?   If we’re thinking more long term, would a guy like Tryamkin be the perfect solution to my problem described above?    Perhaps it’s not worth making a move?    Who knows.

Nobody can afford 6 top 4 d-men. Teams that do don’t keep them all long. Every team suffers injuries. Our D depth is not as thin as you claim. We’ll survive having Benn and/or Stecher play top 4. Especially with our forward depth also being leagues better than last season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, JB could possibly explore a trade involving a forward.

 

But I disagree - our overall depth is NOT what some people think it is.  Is it better than recent years - of course, but it's got a way to go imo.  Look at this week for example.  Marky becomes unavailable, and all of a sudden our goaltending depth is a guy with a dozen NHL games under his belt (Demko), and a journeyman goalie with 8 NHL games to his credit (McIntyre).  This is asking for trouble in a long, arduous season. 

 

If we look at forward, recent events tell us anyone can get an 'illness' at any time.  It is completely conceivable that a forward gets an illness (Ferk) and another top 6 gets injured (say one of Miller/Boeser/BoHo for example) - all of a sudden we're not looking that great at the top 6 anymore. 

 

Like I said, our depth is improved, but definitely needs more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stecher played 1st line minutes last season, and he was a PLUS player in a stretch where the team was on those mega loss streaks.

 

Led the team last year in +/- too.

 

Troy is absolutely a 3/4 guy. Benn too.

 

The bottom pairing can easily slot in up the lineup.

 

But yes, one injury and what looks great right now, is kind of tossed into the wind.

 

We could probably use another guy better than Fantenberg to be the spare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the only forwards with value that would bring back defenseman WORTH obtaining are not up for grabs (Boeser/Horvat/Pettersson). 

 

I honestly think it's Podkolzins fate to return us a young bonafide top 2 dman. In the two years he spends in Russia we will likely solidify our top six in some shape or form. He'll be the odd man out. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're underselling Stecher. Statistically he was our best defender last year. The guy is absolutely a 3/4 defenseman and can fill in on the top pairing if necessary. In my view, our defenseman currently shake out like this:

 

Top Pairing Calibre - Edler, Hughes

 

2nd Pairing Calibre - Myers, Tanev, Stecher

 

3rd Pairing/Fringe Calibre - Benn, Fantanberg, Juolevi

 

If we need anything, its either a top pairing defenseman (in case of injury) or more depth guys who can play 3rd pairing spots. However, we do not have the assets to pull in another top pairing guy, nor do we have the roster spots for another depth guy. So the point feels moot.

Edited by Fateless
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe something like a Honka deal where we're giving up another b-prospect or a F already in Utica could work. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no

starting 6 is good

then fatenberg

sautner

joulevi

other depth with comets

tryamkin

 

focus if anything is to find that elusive left winger to play with bo

but i'm going to give the team 40 games to show whether ferlund, leivo, gaudette, baer, or someone else within the organization can fill that role

otherwise that is the priority for this team

 

there is no need to block path of up and coming dmen

Edited by coastal.view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the Canucks having about 6 top-4 defenseman during the mid-2000's.  

Ohlund, Salo, Bieksa, Edler, Miller, Mitchell.

They didn't do as well as expected.

 

If the bottom pairing guys are legit top-4, you still gotta pay them top-4 money. 

When games are tight, you have to got to have your workhorses.  

 

Not saying you should get AHLers for bottom pairing, but the recipe for success has always been having elite defensemen (easier said than done) rather than just very very strong group as a whole.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

The Canucks should consider trading one of their forwards for a defenseman.  
 

I am extremely impressed with the following:

 

1) Our goaltending depth:  Elite prospect Demko backing up elite goalie Markstrom.

 

2) Our depth up front:   Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin can easily slot into the Top 6 if we get injuries up front.   The presence of both Gaudette and Sutter within our organization ensures that we have enough centermen in case of injuries.   Motte and Roussel give us depth on the bottom 6.
 

So - in net and up front, I think the Canucks are light years ahead of where they once were.

 

Our lack of depth on defense is still a concern to me.

 

While the Canucks defense as a whole is vastly improved, the unfortunate truth of the matter is that

 

1) Edler, Tanev, and Myers are still injury prone D men.  

2) While Benn and Stecher are significant upgrades over Pouliot, Gudbranson, Del Zotto, etc., they are still not top 4 calibre defensemen.  
 

If the Canucks are going to take the next step, I think they’ll need atleast one more dman that can play Top 4 Incase of injuries.....one that not only can “fill in” there, but actually be pretty decent.
 

For example - maybe a dman that is slightly better than both Stecher and Benn......which would then make Stecher our #7.

 

I know that would be unfair to Stecher given the years of service that he’s provided us, but Stecher being our #7 really would signify that this team is deep defensively.   
 

Think back to that 2011 team.   Keith friggin Ballard was our extra.....and he was good enough to NOT look out of place on a top 4.  That’s the kind of depth that I’m talking about. You had Edler, Erhoff, Salo, Bieksa, and Hamhuis.  
 

The current Canucks need one more “good” defenseman to really put themselves on the map in my opinion.    
 

Can someone like Juolevi develop into that guy sooner than later?   Time will tell.    
 

I don’t know which current Canuck has the equivalent value of what I’m looking for (ie someone that is better than Stecher and Benn, but not as good as Edler, Tanev, Hughes, and Myers), but THAT is the forward that I’d look at trading.  
 

Does Virtanen get a defenseman with the above description?

 

 

stecher + a forward for a top 4 d would work for me. One thing about your post is Neither Demko or Marky are Elite goalies, to be called elite a goalie must at least win a round or two in the play offs and they have not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.