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

[Sbriggs]

2 hours ago, Fateless said:

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.

OJ will be a top 4 d man

[BrockBoester]

2 hours ago, the grinder said:

we have that coming already in trymakin no need to trade anyone 

Also Juolevi could pan out and we have decent call up depth in Utica on D.

 

And Fantenberg.

 

I think our depth on D is fine. I like the team how it is now. And things are really looking to get rolling.

 

Let's not make any trades just for the sake of trading, and allow the team to gel and develop chemistry.

[Pears]

Edler, Myers, Hughes, Tanev, Benn, Stecher as the regulars and then Fantenberg, Juolevi, Brisebois, Sautner, Rafferty, Chatfield etc, as the depth. I think we’re pretty ok for defense. 

[Hindustan Smyl]

2 hours ago, Sbriggs said:

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.

 1) I like your Stecher idea a lot.   If it works from a cap perspective, I’m definitely in.

 

2) Fair enough point about Marky and Demko.

 

[Hindustan Smyl]

25 minutes ago, Pears said:

Edler, Myers, Hughes, Tanev, Benn, Stecher as the regulars and then Fantenberg, Juolevi, Brisebois, Sautner, Rafferty, Chatfield etc, as the depth. I think we’re pretty ok for defense. 

I agree for the most part, but I don’t know.....

 

Perhaps it’s PTSD after having watched this team for the past for years, but I don’t expect Edler and Tanev to be healthy all season.   I just don’t.  I expect both guys to miss at lest 10 weeks each at some point......perhaps even at the same time.   If that were to happen, you’d have

 

Hughes-Myers

Benn-Stecher

Juolevi-Fantenberg

 

As your top 6.

 

Again, I’m just assuming a worst case scenario.    Based on the above, perhaps the Canucks could use one more very solid dman?    What do you think?

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

Note: Tags are mandatory only in the Trades, Rumours, Signings forum and in the Proposals and Armchair GM'ing forum.

[6string]

                                                                     

[48MPHSlapShot]

I don't think our bottom pairing is an issue in the slightest. Benn is a serviceable player and Stetcher is arguably well rounded enough with good enough underlying numbers to be a middle pairing guy, albeit on a lesser team.

 

To me, it's our higher end Dmen that may need an upgrade, if not now then eventually. Myers has played well thus far, but history has shown us that he's not a legit top pairing guy. Up until last season Edler wasn't playing like a top pairing Dman. He seems like was able to find an extra gear to his game last season, but his age, proneness to injury and contract status need to be taken into account as well. How long can he keep up this level of play? Tanev's injury issues and lack of production have been the biggest points of contention for him. When he's healthy, he's a good middle pairing guy, but again, you want to get some offense out of your top two pairings, and Tanev is only healthy about 2/3rds of the time, if that. Not exactly a horse to bet on. Hughes projects to be a top pairing Dman, but as of this moment he's still a rookie and is prone to defensive lapses once in a while. Even assuming he does pan out, we'll still need someone to play the opposite side. 

 

While our top two pairings look decent as of this moment, how do they projet in a few years? Out of the four, I can only say with confidence that I see one of them holding down a top 4 spot in...let's say 4 or 5 years. 

 

Point is that I really don't think we should be moving pieces of value like Virtanen/Pearson/etc... for depth defensemen when our depth is pretty solid, with Fantenberg, Rafferty and Juolevi all waiting in the wings when the inevitable injury bug hits. If we do move a forward, I'd rather it be for picks, prospects, or as a package for a more significant return. 

[Phil_314]

I think optimally we would but there's no pressing need to do so.

Our right side D-depth at the NHL level is at least 4 guys deep (our 3 incumbents plus Jordie), while we have two top-pair left D (Hughes is playing against top competition and Eddie's himself), along with Jordie and a slew of depth guys (I hope Olli creates a logjam on the back end upon the first injury we get by playing so well in his call-up that they can't send him back down without seriously considering if he's earned a spot in the big club).  We could also probably find a decent guy with fill-in upside, but it likely won't cost much more than Schaller (and likely not for Goldie or Sven who are NHL-caliber scoring depth).  

[Shirotashi]

14 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?

 

 

You think so lowly of Virtanen that you ponder wether or not he would even fetch you a D-man?

Dead serious do you even watch bro? JV has been showing improvement year by year and 

hes got that grit and hussle we really need. You want him gone for a fill in D-man?

[Canuck Surfer]

27 minutes ago, Shirotashi said:

You think so lowly of Virtanen that you ponder wether or not he would even fetch you a D-man?

Dead serious do you even watch bro? JV has been showing improvement year by year and 

hes got that grit and hussle we really need. You want him gone for a fill in D-man?

How about a good young D man?

 

Jake & Tanev for Cal & Nolan Foote.

[Hindustan Smyl]

2 hours ago, Shirotashi said:

You think so lowly of Virtanen that you ponder wether or not he would even fetch you a D-man?

Dead serious do you even watch bro? JV has been showing improvement year by year and 

hes got that grit and hussle we really need. You want him gone for a fill in D-man?

I’m not sure if this is a troll response or a serious response, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

I don’t think lowly of Virtanen at all.  Although he’s had a long road, he clearly has some potential to be great.    Given that many of our best players in franchise history (Twins, Naslund, Bertuzzi, etc.) took an exponential leap in their games during their mid-to-late 20’s, of course I know that Virtanen could take an exponential leap as well.

 

All I’m saying is this:

 

1) We seem to have an over abundance of depth up front (ie Roussel, Gaudette, Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin Incase of injuries).

 

2) From my point of view, I think one can make a strong case for the fact that we still need some more defensive depth.......especially when you consider the injury histories of Tanev and Edler.    
 

In my opinion, the Canucks need another solid Top 4 dman as an insurance policy.   Someone that is a clear upgrade over Stecher and Benn, as I don’t see Stecher and Benn being viable long term top 4 options Incase we have injuries......although I like both dmen very much.
 

Now obviously - I would love to trade a popcorn fart like Goldobin or Eriksson to land such a piece, but it ain’t happening.  
 

So - if the Canucks need another dman, who is a good bargaining chip?    My vote would be for Virtanen........not because I think Virtanen is a lost cause, but because, I realize how much potential he has and other GM’s likely recognize that as well.    Trade Jake for the defensive equivalent of Jake (ie young talented dman that could still break out) was my suggestion.   In order to receive something of value, you have to give.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Hindustan Smyl

[GhostsOf1994]

18 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?

 

 

1) Canucks goaltending is not elite.

 

2) Eriksson and Goldy are not top 6 at the nhl level. Baertschi needs to play to get into game shape, prove he can stay healthy.

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser 

Pearson Horvat Ferland

Roussel Gaudette Virtanen 

Motte Beagle Sutter

Leivo

 

Schaller Baertschi 

 

Goldobin Eriksson 

 

Edler Myers 

Hughes Tanev

Benn Stecher

 

Fantenberg

Sautner 

 

Juolevi Tryamkin

 

D depth is fine, if we could say upgrade RHD tanev or stecher for a better player.

 

Tanev is UFA at seasons end, stecher is rfa.

Look for troy to be resigned and hopefully an upgrade on Tanev aswell.

 

 

 

Petey, Hughes, Gaudette, Virtanen, Boeser, Horvat would require overpayment to pry out of VAN. Not likely to trade youth unless its a robbery. Baertschi, Goldy, Sutter will be moved for D depth before Virtanen.

 

STOP TRADING VIRTANEN!

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2019 by GhostsOf1994

[Hindustan Smyl]

7 minutes ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

1) Canucks goaltending is not elite.

 

2) Eriksson and Goldy are not top 6 at the nhl level. Baertschi needs to play to get into game shape, prove he can stay healthy.

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser 

Pearson Horvat Ferland

Roussel Gaudette Virtanen 

Motte Beagle Sutter

Leivo

 

Schaller Baertschi 

 

Goldobin Eriksson 

 

Edler Myers 

Hughes Tanev

Benn Stecher

 

Fantenberg

Sautner 

 

Juolevi Tryamkin

 

D depth is fine, if we could say upgrade RHD tanev or stecher for a better player.

 

Tanev is UFA at seasons end, stecher is rfa.

Look for troy to be resigned and hopefully an upgrade on Tanev aswell.

 

 

 

Petey, Hughes, Gaudette, Virtanen, Boeser, Horvat would require overpayment to pry out of VAN. Not likely to trade youth unless its a robbery. Baertschi, Goldy, Sutter will be moved for D depth before Virtanen.

 

STOP TRADING VIRTANEN!

 

 

 

Eriksson and Goldie aren’t top 6 NHL’ers, but they aren’t the worst options in the world to use up there in case of injuries.

 

I like Virtanen a lot more than you think (see my above post).

[GhostsOf1994]

6 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I don't think our bottom pairing is an issue in the slightest. Benn is a serviceable player and Stetcher is arguably well rounded enough with good enough underlying numbers to be a middle pairing guy, albeit on a lesser team.

 

To me, it's our higher end Dmen that may need an upgrade, if not now then eventually. Myers has played well thus far, but history has shown us that he's not a legit top pairing guy. Up until last season Edler wasn't playing like a top pairing Dman. He seems like was able to find an extra gear to his game last season, but his age, proneness to injury and contract status need to be taken into account as well. How long can he keep up this level of play? Tanev's injury issues and lack of production have been the biggest points of contention for him. When he's healthy, he's a good middle pairing guy, but again, you want to get some offense out of your top two pairings, and Tanev is only healthy about 2/3rds of the time, if that. Not exactly a horse to bet on. Hughes projects to be a top pairing Dman, but as of this moment he's still a rookie and is prone to defensive lapses once in a while. Even assuming he does pan out, we'll still need someone to play the opposite side. 

 

While our top two pairings look decent as of this moment, how do they projet in a few years? Out of the four, I can only say with confidence that I see one of them holding down a top 4 spot in...let's say 4 or 5 years. 

 

Point is that I really don't think we should be moving pieces of value like Virtanen/Pearson/etc... for depth defensemen when our depth is pretty solid, with Fantenberg, Rafferty and Juolevi all waiting in the wings when the inevitable injury bug hits. If we do move a forward, I'd rather it be for picks, prospects, or as a package for a more significant return. 

Myers will be here still.

Hughes

Juolevi

Tryamkin 

Woo..maybe....Utunen..Rathbone...Teves... Rafferty... Brisebois...Chatfield... 

 

Any signings or trades.... oh and this thing called drafting...

 

[IBatch]

Can see why the OP is worrying about what happens when Edler and or Myers goes down - the past few years our losing streaks always coincide with Edler/Tanev/Sutter injuries.   Hughes and Stetcher could assume some of it for a while but it’s not the same.    This year our depth is much better given we’ve added Hughes and Myers and Benn are upgrades on the first and third pairing.  

 

Im not too concerned about this year, what really is worrisome is who will replace Edler in two years (maybe Elder, but really we can’t expect much past this contract given his age and he’s no Lidstrom/Borque).    OJ is the obvious choice - but he’s still got to prove he can play a game in the NHL and also prove that he’s not made of glass.   Woo is looking more promising IMO - and nobody is expecting him to be a number one or very good number two like the Eagle has been for his entire career.  

 

Podz could be used in a trade for a young top four projected D...or we might have to keeping buying them like we just did with Myers...long term, as of this time at least it’s uncertain if we have anyone to replace Edler in the system.

Edited October 17, 2019 by IBatch

[IBatch]

7 hours ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

Myers will be here still.

Hughes

Juolevi

Tryamkin 

Woo..maybe....Utunen..Rathbone...Teves... Rafferty... Brisebois...Chatfield... 

 

Any signings or trades.... oh and this thing called drafting...

 

Of those only Hughes is a slam dunk top four,  and I’m not at all convinced he will ever be able to play the toughest shut down minutes given his size.   Tryamkin maybe ... at least when he comes back he will be seasoned, on a good team bottom pairing seems more likely - the KHL is no NHL.   OJ is a huge maybe, injuries are concerning to say the least.  Woo a little less so but still a maybe.  

 

This thing called drafting - well when did we draft our most likely future NHL D prospects?  Five years - two years ago.   Only Hughes has made it on the team so far....in four/five years the likelihood of any future draftees ending up as top four  in that time frame is pretty slim.   Our defense is definitely still a weak link, at least when it comes to contending.   It’s definetly not without promise - but aside from Hughes no sure things. 

Edited October 17, 2019 by IBatch

[48MPHSlapShot]

3 hours ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

Myers will be here still.

Hughes

Juolevi

Tryamkin 

Woo..maybe....Utunen..Rathbone...Teves... Rafferty... Brisebois...Chatfield... 

 

Any signings or trades.... oh and this thing called drafting...

 

Myers likely won’t be what he is now in 5 years, and Juolevi and Tryamkin are massive question marks. Point is we shouldn’t be moving tangible assets for redundant pieces like bottom pairing Dmen when there are a ton of question marks surrounding what our top 4 are going to look like in a few years. If we’re going to flip a forward, it should be for picks, prospects, or as part of a package for something more significant imho. 

[GritGrinder]

On 10/16/2019 at 11:32 AM, 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.

So EP or Boeser go down with an injury and you replace them with Baertschi or Goldobin and you think that is insurance and that the Canucks won't miss a beat? 

 

Depth doesn't just mean a healthy body, they have to reasonably be able to replace that player and Baertschi and Goldobin do NOT reasonably replace EP or Boeser. Look up the stat WAR (Wins Above Replacement) it gives good analysis as to the depth of a team.

Edited October 17, 2019 by GritGrinder

[kloubek]

I really don't think we need more defensive depth.

 

We have Fantenberg as first callup, then a selection of Sautner, Teves, Rafferty, Brisebois and Juolevi - all who could be capable of stepping in if need be and a couple who might be really quite capable while doing it. Tryamkin may be coming back later in the season and will need a spot if he does.

 

On forward, we clearly have NHL quality depth as well in Baertschi as first callup, and Goldobin or MacEwan if need be - but if anything I would say we have less NHL-ready forward depth than we do defensive depth.

 

Regardless, I think we are more or less covered.