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

[Waivers] David Backes, Luke Schenn


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Yeah, Benn's really tearing it up, isn't he?

At least he isn't on waivers :bigblush:

 

I get the hype around Schenn, but I dunno. With the way coaches like to use d-men, right handed d-men on the right side left D on the left, I don't see us even playing Schenn. Tanev, Myers and Stecher don't hit nearly as much but are much more effective in literally every other part of the game. And if a right D injury does happen, knock on wood it doesn't, I want to see Rafferty.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, oldnews said:

And Fantenburg is probably better than Benn.    The team is progressing further into it's up-tempo, two-way blueprint - and Fantenburg's mobility (as well as probably a better first pass and quicker decision-making to go along with it) seems to have earned him a leap-frog over Benn in the depth chart.   I'd qualify that, however, by saying that Benn was forced to step up - perhaps to an uncomfortable degree in Edler's absence - somewhat exposing him - and there is a possibility that this is not simply a 'merit' matter - there is a chance that Benn is not entirely healthy - but my take would be that Fantenburg is a better fit in that 3LHD spot.

Fantenburg and Benn play a different game.  I find Benn to be better in the dzone, but OF is a much better passer, no question, and he's better in the ozone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, stawns said:

Fantenburg and Benn play a different game.  I find Benn to be better in the dzone, but OF is a much better passer, no question, and he's better in the ozone.

I woudl divide that take into different aspects - Benn may be better in some aspects in the dzone, but he is more prone to poor first passes/poor decisions with the puck (not Hutton levels of hesitancy/braincramp - and everyone, including Fantenburg is subject to mistakes in that sense, particularly under pressure)..   I'd say Benn is slightly more physical and 'deterrent' - but Fantenburg's gap control, mobility, puck retrieval, and puck movement/first pass = it would be hard to maintain that Benn is better in these aspects of dzone play.   Overall, I'd probably side with Green on this and take Fantenburg's presece - based on merit this season.  I would leave it open, however to the possibility that Benn is not or has not been 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was impressed with Schenn in his short term with us.  

Benning offer him 1m. And Luke went on to sign with Tampa for 1 yr / 700k... rough guess has his cap hit at 175 k ?

Would be a great D strength grab if we are in playoff contention..  I can not and would not want to see Joulevi up for the playoffs to off set any injuries. ... but to have Schenn for injury depth support,?.  that would be a positive move..

Can not see us having cap issues with this..    but we are due for Defensive injury set backs.. and we would not have that depth for playoff participation.. and would rather have a solid physical vet like Schenn for playoff support before any rookie from Utica.

We are weak enough back there.

Id do it.. it’s a no loss scenario. It makes sense.

 

Edited by SilentSam
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I'd trade Tanev instead of Stecher. He has more value to other teams, and I have a feeling that this is his last season as a Canuck.

I'm happy that he's been healthy, but his play hasn't been great, imo.  That said, he will have value, but if the Nucks are still in the the thick of it, I don't see anyway he's moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I was impressed with Schenn in his short term with us.  

Benning offer him 1m. And Luke went on to sign with Tampa for 1 yr / 700k... rough guess has his cap hit at 175 k ?

Would be a great D strength grab if we are in playoff contention..  I can not and would not want to see Joulevi up for the playoffs to off set any injuries. ... but to have Schenn for injury depth support,?.  that would be a positive move..

Can not see us having cap issues with this..    but we are due for Defensive injury set backs.. and we would not have that depth for playoff participation.. and would rather have a solid physical vet like Schenn for playoff support before any rookie from Utica.

We are weak enough back there.

Id do it.. it’s a no loss scenario. It makes sense.

 

whats the point?  He'll have OF and Benn ahead of him on the depth chart.  Claim him just to have him sit in the pressbox for the rest of the season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'm happy that he's been healthy, but his play hasn't been great, imo.  That said, he will have value, but if the Nucks are still in the the thick of it, I don't see anyway he's moved.

I'd be OK with Benn being moved to TO e.g., since they need left side experience, given how well Fantenberg is doing and the depth in Utica. Can't see Tanev moved unless its something ridiculous on offer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I woudl divide that take into different aspects - Benn may be better in some aspects in the dzone, but he is more prone to poor first passes/poor decisions with the puck (not Hutton levels of hesitancy/braincramp - and everyone, including Fantenburg is subject to mistakes in that sense, particularly under pressure)..   I'd say Benn is slightly more physical and 'deterrent' - but Fantenburg's gap control, mobility, puck retrieval, and puck movement/first pass = it would be hard to maintain that Benn is better in these aspects of dzone play.   Overall, I'd probably side with Green on this and take Fantenburg's presece - based on merit this season.  I would leave it open, however to the possibility that Benn is not or has not been 100%.

I'd take OF as well.  Benn is good depth and might be better with a better d partner, but OF is better overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

I'd be OK with Benn being moved to TO e.g., since they need left side experience, given how well Fantenberg is doing and the depth in Utica. Can't see Tanev moved unless its something ridiculous on offer. 

I'd be ok with that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to see them bring back the schenndozer for that added toughness. I was stoked when benning signed benn but he’s been a disappointment so far Imo, seems like a bit of a fake tough guy with all the tattoos and big beard and yet not any memorable hits or scraps yet. I still think we need a physical deterrent sometimes and schenn was awesome in that role last year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd take OF as well.  Benn is good depth and might be better with a better d partner, but OF is better overall.

I'm glad they signed them both - I had my doubts that OF would be better than alternatives, but he's proving to be stiff competition for Benn (a signing I also liked and still do).  The team has always needed ridiculous amounts of depth to deal with what seem to be inevitable injuries - they seem to have reached a critical mass where they have that and are able to struggle through key absences and turn it up once they gain a relatively healthy lineup.

I might have liked a bargain signing of Sbisa, but I have no complaints - and I think they've upgraded on Hutton twofold (at least where Hutton had been with us - he could stll improve, but I think with as much youth in the lineup as they have, and adding Hughes as a rookie pmd, a bit more veteran presence probably made sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would anyone be interested in trading for Brenden Dillon rather than picking Luke Schenn off of waivers? Schenn's speed is a question mark, and I do believe Dillon is a better skater, and a better player overall. He has superior size to Schenn as well, and is a better fighter, if need be.

 

I'd be happy if Benning made a trade for him. The defense needs at least one nuclear deterrent, as Myers isn't cutting it in that department.

 

Dillon and Benn on a third pairing would be great come playoff time.

Edited by PhillipBlunt
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I'd be OK with Benn being moved to TO e.g., since they need left side experience, given how well Fantenberg is doing and the depth in Utica. Can't see Tanev moved unless its something ridiculous on offer. 

Benn leaves Montreal as a fan favourite to take the same contract offer to sign with his hometown team only to be traded in less than a season and to Toronto of all places (rival of Montreal and most locals likely have something against Toronto).

 

I think we could do better for Benn.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Would anyone be interested in trading for Brenden Dillon rather than picking Luke Schenn off of waivers? Schenn's speed is a question mark, and I do believe Dillon is a better skater, and a better player overall. He has superior size to Schenn as well, and is a better fighter, if need be.

 

I'd be happy if Benning made a trade for him. The defense needs at least one nuclear deterrent, as Myers isn't cutting it in that department.

 

Dillon and Benn on a third pairing would be great come playoff time.

Dillon>>>>>>>>>Schenn 100%

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...