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

[Waivers] David Backes, Luke Schenn


Recommended Posts

11 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.

@kingofsurrey might bust a nut if we acquired Dillon. 
 

Can almost guarantee he has some story about a neighbour/coworker/bowling teammate who knows Dillon. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

@kingofsurrey might bust a nut if we acquired Dillon. 
 

Can almost guarantee he has some story about a neighbour/coworker/bowling teammate who knows Dillon. 

I know someone who went to high school with Dillon. He apparently was a scrawny kid, but he sure has grown up and filled out now.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, theo5789 said:

I know someone who went to high school with Dillon. He apparently was a scrawny kid, but he sure has grown up and filled out now.

Dillon likes to fight  and sticks up for his teamates....   much like a Surrey girl sticks up for her boyfriend and her friends...

 

Unfortunately though unlike a Surrey girl.....    Dillon pretty much loses every fight he is in.....   has a decent chin on him though as he always manages to stay upright. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I know someone who went to high school with Dillon. He apparently was a scrawny kid, but he sure has grown up and filled out now.

Yeah, I’ve met him a couple times through friends. Saw him when he was in junior and the AHL but it’s probably been 5-6 years since then. He was a solid guy, very down to earth. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stawns said:

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?

What’s the point?

if we go seven games in the first round,

one or more of Tanev, Edler or Stetcher will be injured..

might as well have more meet than juggling potatoes back there..  is playoff hockey in Vancouver that far forgotten?

it war man.

aprx 175k for an expiring contract that can give us depth..  let’s be real about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour 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%.

Nothing wrong with adding Schenn to give depth to this for the playoffs..

almost free on an expiring contract low cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

MacEwan can go down. He’s not playing

but neither would Schenn be - in fact he'd be the 8th man on a depth chart that is actually healthy.

I don't see the point.

MacEwen is earning an NHL salary - there's something to be said for that - it's a significant gain over his AHL salary - I'm imagining he doesn't mind.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

What’s the point?

if we go seven games in the first round,

one or more of Tanev, Edler or Stetcher will be injured..

might as well have more meet than juggling potatoes back there..  is playoff hockey in Vancouver that far forgotten?

it war man.

aprx 175k for an expiring contract that can give us depth..  let’s be real about this.

All three have been healthy, for most of the year, but I do get what you're saying.  However, to keep him, Benn and OF on the roster means that fwd depth will have to depleted to make room on the roster.  In thew end, I wouldn't complain about it, but don't think it's absolutely necessary either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

I know someone who went to high school with Dillon. He apparently was a scrawny kid, but he sure has grown up and filled out now.

to get Dillon, who I do like, would mean giving up a moderately significant asset.  Perhaps they do a goldy or Baer swap for him.........anything other than that and it's probably not worth it for JB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

I really like Schenn - he was fun in his time here, and solid enough under the circumstances -  but let's be real - he's a good #8 D / #4RHD - who would be buried hopelessly deeply beneath Tanev, Myers, Stecher = as long as they are healthy, he's a long-term scratch and waiver material.

 

The idea that he belonged in the top 4 (as did Hutton apparetly) was a hopelessly bad idea - and moreover, the common idea on these boards that he should have played alongside Quinn Hughes this year would have been a commitment to another tank season.  I personally am happy not to be watching Huttons, Schenns, et al in the top 4 - I think Benning made the right call pursuing Myers and adding depth like Benn, Fantenburg.  Benn has been somwhat disappointing - but at the same time, the team wasn't really equipped to handle a loss like Edler - in his absence, with Benn stepping up to effectively the #1LHdefensive D, the team was in trouble - and Fantenburg effectively leap-frogged him through that opportunity.  I'm not surprised Green continued to go with Fantenburg over Benn after Edler's return - he was better than Benn during that opportunity to get into the lineup.

 

Schenn just doesn't have the feet/mobility to play that role on a competitive hockey team.  He's a prototypical depth, exclusively role / shutdown D but doesn't have the necessary versatility imo to play the kind of role you need beside a player like Hughes. 

Tanev has been outstanding in that sense - in spite of his lack of physicality.   That pairing's first pass, their puck retrieval, and their crafty defensive finesse have been excellent - particularly when the team has some heavier forwards and outstanding defensive forwards to support them (Miiller, Horvat, Pearson, Sutter, Beagle, Motte, Virtanen....Leivo, Ferland, Roussel....)

 

Anyhow - I wish Schenn the best and wouldn't be surprised if an injured or shallower team took the opportunity to add him (depending on their needs) = he is a serviceable role/depth D.

Where have you been, bud?  Always enjoy reading your posts.  Hope you're back to posting more regularly.  Cheers.

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

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

to get Dillon, who I do like, would mean giving up a moderately significant asset.  Perhaps they do a goldy or Baer swap for him.........anything other than that and it's probably not worth it for JB

I bet he goes for a bit cheaper than expected. Teams know they probably can't afford to re-sign him. So they might be looking for a close to NHL ready prospect like Brisebois. So I guess it depends if that is something moderately significant.

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...