[Rumour] Mikael Granlund Available

[kenhodgejr]

Canucks should pass. We need another JT miller type who can crash and bang and stand up for teammates if necessary. Maybe Chris Kreider 

[GhostsOf1994]

3 hours ago, wildcam said:

Yes Gaudette will get the 1.4 - 1.6 million x 2yrs show me deal..

I agree Stetcher will be moved with Rafferty and Juolevi ready...

Don't you think Gaudette being a C and having better PPG than Virtanen entitles him to the same money ?

[GhostsOf1994]

2 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

Canucks should pass. We need another JT miller type who can crash and bang and stand up for teammates if necessary. Maybe Chris Kreider 

Kreider breaking Petey's nose says he will never be his teammate.

[Kanukfanatic]

7 hours ago, Metal Face Doom said:

So what?  You want a bonafide All-star?  Not happening.  

 

I think depending on the cost, Granlund would be a great addition.   

Your  comprehension is poor.

 

Mikael Granlund

 

 

I said what I thought...we do not need another middling forward. We already have too many forwards. Who would he replace?

 

 

We have 8 forwards that have more points than does. 

 

No thanks.

 

But if you think the Canucks should take on another middling guy, what would you trade for him and who would you move out so he could take their place?

 

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by Kanukfanatic

[Kanukfanatic]

5 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

Canucks should pass. We need another JT miller type who can crash and bang and stand up for teammates if necessary. Maybe Chris Kreider 

I agree with this completely. We don't need more average soft type players. We saw for a number of years how that does not work.

 

 

[mll]

12 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Something isn't working there right now. They have a decent team on paper. They've changed the coaching, if that doesn't solve the problem, then maybe their lineup makeup isn't right. Duchene hasn't really lived up to the billing so far and Turris was a dud. Do they think signing more high priced FAs is the solution? Not even sure if they can afford it. Moving a couple pending UFAs isn't going to resolve that.

 

They could wait things out, but the rumour is they're looking to sell, so they're trying to make something happen and at the same time, I'm sure they don't want to throw this season away.

 

Something is definitely not clicking.  The team is coming out flat and the season is slipping away.  Not sure they have what it takes to get back on track.  They have so many things to work through and it seems like some guys are playing scared which just makes their play worse.  Poile put everyone on notice other than Josi - he blamed them collectively for the coaching change and some got individual discussions.

 

Hynes' interviews are pretty thoughtful and he addressed a multitude of their issues.  It's not about ability but more discipline, attention to detail and also confidence.  They get down on themselves and then stop playing.

 

As you say they seem to have a good team on paper.  I think Poile is sincere when he says everyone gets a clean slate under Hynes and that he prefers to keep the group together.  He might end up having no choice but Hynes has not even had 2 full weeks with the team.

 

I think Hynes' input is going to carry a lot of weight on what they do going forward but it's so early in his tenure and they are adjusting systems.  It sounds quite different from Laviolette and Forsberg talked of how it should help the Fs get more involved.

 

Maybe some players won't fit under Hynes and there could be some changes to signed players or even their core, but that's different than moving a somewhat underwhelming UFA at the TDL.  The return for Granlund is not going to be great and the cap space is likely more valuable.

 

It seems somewhat ambitious to change coach and systems and then decide on top of that to shake up their roster - all that before the TDL.  Would teams heading to the playoffs really want to shake up their own team and mess up with chemistry.  I think if they want to cut deeper than the UFAs it would be in the off-season.

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by mll

[JM_]

50 minutes ago, mll said:

 

Something is definitely not clicking.  The team is coming out flat and the season is slipping away.  Not sure they have what it takes to get back on track.  They have so many things to work through and it seems like some guys are playing scared which just makes their play worse.  Poile put everyone on notice other than Josi - he blamed them collectively for the coaching change and some got individual discussions.

 

Hynes' interviews are pretty thoughtful and he addressed a multitude of their issues.  It's not about ability but more discipline, attention to detail and also confidence.  They get down on themselves and then stop playing.

 

As you say they seem to have a good team on paper.  I think Poile is sincere when he says everyone gets a clean slate under Hynes and that he prefers to keep the group together.  He might end up having no choice but Hynes has not even had 2 full weeks with the team.

 

I think Hynes' input is going to carry a lot of weight on what they do going forward but it's so early in his tenure and they are adjusting systems.  It sounds quite different from Laviolette and Forsberg talked of how it should help the Fs get more involved.

 

Maybe some players won't fit under Hynes and there could be some changes to signed players or even their core, but that's different than moving a somewhat underwhelming UFA at the TDL.  The return for Granlund is not going to be great and the cap space is likely more valuable.

 

It seems somewhat ambitious to change coach and systems and then decide on top of that to shake up their roster - all that before the TDL.  Would teams heading to the playoffs really want to shake up their own team and mess up with chemistry.  I think if they want to cut deeper than the UFAs it would be in the off-season.

 

I don't think this team has what it takes to leapfrog 4 teams and gain 7 points on them to get to he 2nd wildcard spot. But I also don't see how they're going to be much better with so much money tied up in older underperforming players even next season, they only have 9 mil to spend and seem to like a bit of cap cushion. 

[oldnews]

18 hours ago, Gaudette Celly said:

Benning said as much today.  He's happy with not only how the team is playing, but the chemistry that has developed.  So he's not only more hesitant to try to add a top-6 now, but figures there is enough in the pipeline to supplement or "add" internally.  Not only with Ferland and Leivo to return, but others like Bailey he'd like to have a look at as well.

 

No to Granlund, especially at that price.  Kreider would be great, especially for playoff heaviness, but at what cost.  Not to mention there will be other suitors willing to bid him up.  Edmonton and Calgary would love to get someone like Kreider into their fluffy lineups.

 

I think when people see what that cost is, it will be a good time to revisit the Miller trade assessments - the demand for and cost of a player like Kreider ought to make it a bit clearer what it takes to enter the premier powerforward market.   At that point I think it mght be a bit clearer how generallly poor the estimations of the cost of Miller were.

 

Kreider / career - (both of these players entered the NHL in 2012).

303 points / 75 of them on the powerplay

508 games  37 pts/77 playoff games

53.6% ozone starts

51.2% corsi

1.98 hits / game

277 giveaways, 154 takeaway

209 blocked shots

441 pm

16:08 ice time/game

 

Miller career

283 points / 73 of them on the powerplay

484 games  26pts/61 playoff games

52.8% Ozone starts

50.2% corsi

1.6 hits/game

284 giveaways

252 takeaways

237 blocked shots

220 pm

15:27 ice time/game

 

Kreider at a 4.65 million cap hit and expiring - will be a blockbuster acquisition for whomever, if anyone,  manages to acquire him.

Miller at 5.25 million with 4 years remaining - was an alleged 'cap dump'

 

It will be a good "learning window"/moment for the Vancouver media and market regarding real market value for forwards like this - and keep in mind that while Kreider might have slight edges in 'grit', and heaviness to his game, MIller has a versatility edge - as a center winger, and moreover in that versatility is an elite faceoff center (who at 59.3% is 2nd in the NHL just edging Beagle as 59.2% - but on that side note I would credit Beagle, who takes the vast majority of draws in the D zone, as being slightly better if we adjust for that fact - not that it matters much for the purposes here).

 

Bottom line - yes, it will cost a significant amount to acquire Kreider.  Not only are the Rangers not in a position where they need to move cap, but the market for Kreider, in spite of expiring, will come at a time when teams are both competing to enhance their lineups for a playoff run, but also at a time when his cap hit is pro-rated/more manageable down the stretch run of a season (with injury relief, etc).  Benning's acquisition of MIller came not only with years of term to advantage (at a great cap hit), but with great. opportune timing and circumstances/context.  See what the Kreider market is should help this market form a better understanding of what Benning pulled off in the Miller deal.

 

I'll have to listen to that interview you refer to  - I always enjoy listening to Benning - he's pretty forthcoming in general (with maybe an exception when it comes to pre-draft times, where he seems to offer some misdirection about his interests/intentions/targets - and understandably so, this is the type of strategic wisdom you hope your GM displays - in those cases he seems like a deceptively cagey poker player).

[oldnews]

8 hours ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

Don't you think Gaudette being a C and having better PPG than Virtanen entitles him to the same money ?

Not really / I don't think so.

 

First, your facts aren't correct

Gaudette is scoring .54 ppg.

Virtanen is scoring .57 ppg

 

Second, Virtanen's production becomes better in context.

Gaudette

4 of his 8 goals and 8 of his 13 assists are at even strength = his scoring is far more weighted to powerplay production.

Virtanen

11 of his 14 goals and 11 of his 14 assists are at even strength.  Gaudette generally plays/needs sheltered minutes and has scored disproportionately on the man advantage, whereas Virtanen's zone starts are somewhat misleading by virtue of playing with Gaudette - otherwise he's capable of and has played on matchup lines to the point where he now forms a viable two-way complement for a young forward like Gaudette (albeit the same age)

 

They may both be 23 years old, but Virtanen has 259 games of NHL experience, Gaudette 100 - which matters, because Virtanen has spent that additional time developing as a two-way forward, for the most part playing in matchup line contexts - his game is further developed than Gaudette's at this point - and most of his experience and production have come while playing harder minutes than Gaudette (and a more physical presence in the process).

[GhostsOf1994]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

Not really / I don't think so.

 

First, your facts aren't correct

Gaudette is scoring .54 ppg.

Virtanen is scoring .57 ppg

 

Second, Virtanen's production becomes better in context.

Gaudette

4 of his 8 goals and 8 of his 13 assists are at even strength = his scoring is far more weighted to powerplay production.

Virtanen

11 of his 14 goals and 11 of his 14 assists are at even strength.  Gaudette generally plays/needs sheltered minutes and has scored disproportionately on the man advantage, whereas Virtanen's zone starts are somewhat misleading by virtue of playing with Gaudette - otherwise he's capable of and has played on matchup lines to the point where he now forms a viable two-way complement for a young forward like Gaudette (albeit the same age)

 

They may both be 23 years old, but Virtanen has 259 games of NHL experience, Gaudette 100 - which matters, because Virtanen has spent that additional time developing as a two-way forward, for the most part playing in matchup line contexts - his game is further developed than Gaudette's at this point - and most of his experience and production have come while playing harder minutes than Gaudette (and a more physical presence in the process).

Oh no 

 

Since Gaudette has been up in the bigs this year he out performed jake until recently.

 

Yes playing in college = less time in the nhl or ahl

 

Virtanens rookie season should not have started until at least a year later than it did.

 

A .03ppg difference is a how many point difference?

 

28pts for JV over 49 gp about 45-50over 82gp

21pts for AG over 39gp about 42-45over 82gp

 

Lets look at Virtanens last 10 games point spread, Last 10gp =7 Points. Playing with Petey/Miller/Horvat/Pearson.

 

AG last 10gp=5 points, playing with Roussel/Schaller/Motte/??

 

Do you see a difference in quality of linemates?

 

Now lets look at AG being a C and playing more of a checking/energy line and on both ends of the special teams units.

 

Does JV play on the P.K.? 2nd unit PP with AG.

 

Jv experience works against him here in negotiations.

 

AG is improving faster than JV.

 

Please tell me again why JV is worth more then AG? 

 

 

[KKnight]

5 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

I agree with this completely. We don't need more average soft type players. We saw for a number of years how that does not work.

 

 

I would be looking at Mantha, Rakell and Josh Anderson in the offseason. I think an addition of Tryamkin would give us some jam on the back end, no need for big acquisitions until the offseason. I say we go with the team we have right now, unless we get a deal we cant refuse. I want to see what these guys can do in postseason hockey. 

Edited January 22, 2020 by KKnight

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, mll said:

 

Something is definitely not clicking.  The team is coming out flat and the season is slipping away.  Not sure they have what it takes to get back on track.  They have so many things to work through and it seems like some guys are playing scared which just makes their play worse.  Poile put everyone on notice other than Josi - he blamed them collectively for the coaching change and some got individual discussions.

 

Hynes' interviews are pretty thoughtful and he addressed a multitude of their issues.  It's not about ability but more discipline, attention to detail and also confidence.  They get down on themselves and then stop playing.

 

As you say they seem to have a good team on paper.  I think Poile is sincere when he says everyone gets a clean slate under Hynes and that he prefers to keep the group together.  He might end up having no choice but Hynes has not even had 2 full weeks with the team.

 

I think Hynes' input is going to carry a lot of weight on what they do going forward but it's so early in his tenure and they are adjusting systems.  It sounds quite different from Laviolette and Forsberg talked of how it should help the Fs get more involved.

 

Maybe some players won't fit under Hynes and there could be some changes to signed players or even their core, but that's different than moving a somewhat underwhelming UFA at the TDL.  The return for Granlund is not going to be great and the cap space is likely more valuable.

 

It seems somewhat ambitious to change coach and systems and then decide on top of that to shake up their roster - all that before the TDL.  Would teams heading to the playoffs really want to shake up their own team and mess up with chemistry.  I think if they want to cut deeper than the UFAs it would be in the off-season.

 

Stecher (RFA) and Sutter could still be on the table in the off-season if they choose to wait out the year. They could also be proactive like they were in changing coaches and see if they can salvage this season. Not saying Sutter and Stecher get that done, but Granlund isn't doing it for them either, so where's the risk? They are unlikely to be able to dump him and they are the ones making him "available", so if they don't like the offer (my proposal), then they can find another deal or wait until his contract is up and get his full cap space. I just don't think they have room to make a big splash in UFA anyway as they don't have room and not many teams are left to help them make room unless they are willing to pay with prospects/picks to do so (which for a cap strapped team, they should be avoiding as cheap ELCs help maintain a competitive roster). They made room for Duchene and even that hasn't been that successful, so do they want to continue this route?

 

Personally I think upgrading their bottom pairing D and bottom 6 forward (instead of running with a couple of relatively inexperienced AHL call-ups) while ridding themselves of a player that hasn't been all that useful to them is hardly a major shake up to their roster. Whatever chemistry they have isn't exactly getting them results at the moment. As for teams heading into the playoffs, many teams make additions at the trade deadline to bolster their group, so it's not really a reach to see teams make adjustments to their lineups. We aren't talking like teams are trading core players here.

[oldnews]

43 minutes ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

Oh no 

 

Since Gaudette has been up in the bigs this year he out performed jake until recently.

 

Yes playing in college = less time in the nhl or ahl

 

Virtanens rookie season should not have started until at least a year later than it did.

 

A .03ppg difference is a how many point difference?

 

28pts for JV over 49 gp about 45-50over 82gp

21pts for AG over 39gp about 42-45over 82gp

 

Lets look at Virtanens last 10 games point spread, Last 10gp =7 Points. Playing with Petey/Miller/Horvat/Pearson.

 

AG last 10gp=5 points, playing with Roussel/Schaller/Motte/??

 

Do you see a difference in quality of linemates?

 

Now lets look at AG being a C and playing more of a checking/energy line and on both ends of the special teams units.

 

Does JV play on the P.K.? 2nd unit PP with AG.

 

Jv experience works against him here in negotiations.

 

AG is improving faster than JV.

 

Please tell me again why JV is worth more then AG? 

 

 

You're weak on the facts once again. 

 

Gaudette hasn't played a whiff with Motte.  Zero.

He hasn't played a whiff with Schaller over the period you claim.  Zero.

 

Who has Gaudette actually played with as Virtanen stepped off that line and up in the lineup?   Boeser.

 

The Gaudtte, Roussel, Virtanen line is 4 x as frequent a combination as any other Gaudette has seen this season.

 

Look at the actual context of Gaudette's play recently:

100% ozone starts in the SJ game, with Boeser, not Schaller or Motte on his wing.  2 pts.

71% ozons starts vs Arizona, with Boeser.

Played with Virtanen vs Buffalo.  1 pt.

 

Again start from a basis of facts or there's not much to see here.

[aGENT]

10 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

Calgary looking for speed and skill for top 6 wing. He might be a buy low gamble worth taking

I could see them offering Bennett +/-

 

@mll ?

Edited January 22, 2020 by aGENT

[mll]

 

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I don't think this team has what it takes to leapfrog 4 teams and gain 7 points on them to get to he 2nd wildcard spot. But I also don't see how they're going to be much better with so much money tied up in older underperforming players even next season, they only have 9 mil to spend and seem to like a bit of cap cushion. 

I don't think they have it in them to make the playoffs this season either. Bonino is their oldest at 31. They aren't old but do have some big under-performing contracts. Poile talked of how their best players are not their best players and they need them to be their best players.  He said he had some individual discussions - guessing everyone in the top-6 got a talk to.

 

Hynes is definitely looking to make adjustments to get more out of their top-6 but probably also because the league has evolved.  He is focused on quality of shots rather than volume and wants the puck to get quickly up to the Fs.

 

Forsberg's quote is interesting (via Vingan in the Athletic): "We have some (defensemen) that can skate the puck, especially Roman (Josi). You don't want to take that away, especially from his game. But at the same time, if we can involve forwards more in the rush, that'd be great."

 

My feeling is that this coaching change is going to help them - a new perspective after playing so long under Laviolette.  

[JM_]

30 minutes ago, mll said:

Forsberg's quote is interesting (via Vingan in the Athletic): "We have some (defensemen) that can skate the puck, especially Roman (Josi). You don't want to take that away, especially from his game. But at the same time, if we can involve forwards more in the rush, that'd be great."

 

My feeling is that this coaching change is going to help them - a new perspective after playing so long under Laviolette.  

yeah that certainly sounds like a coaching issue. I guess we'll see if they can get that magic bump some teams get new coaching. 

[mll]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Stecher (RFA) and Sutter could still be on the table in the off-season if they choose to wait out the year. They could also be proactive like they were in changing coaches and see if they can salvage this season. Not saying Sutter and Stecher get that done, but Granlund isn't doing it for them either, so where's the risk? They are unlikely to be able to dump him and they are the ones making him "available", so if they don't like the offer (my proposal), then they can find another deal or wait until his contract is up and get his full cap space. I just don't think they have room to make a big splash in UFA anyway as they don't have room and not many teams are left to help them make room unless they are willing to pay with prospects/picks to do so (which for a cap strapped team, they should be avoiding as cheap ELCs help maintain a competitive roster). They made room for Duchene and even that hasn't been that successful, so do they want to continue this route?

 

Personally I think upgrading their bottom pairing D and bottom 6 forward (instead of running with a couple of relatively inexperienced AHL call-ups) while ridding themselves of a player that hasn't been all that useful to them is hardly a major shake up to their roster. Whatever chemistry they have isn't exactly getting them results at the moment. As for teams heading into the playoffs, many teams make additions at the trade deadline to bolster their group, so it's not really a reach to see teams make adjustments to their lineups. We aren't talking like teams are trading core players here.

 

The risk is tying 4.375M + circa 2.5M in players that are not going to change their fate going forward.   That's a lot of cap for bottom of the lineup players.  Hynes wants to play differently than Laviolette.  They are still working through system adjustments.  

 

In the off-season maybe they want to change the bottom of their lineup but there's just so little time until the TDL.  Hynes doesn't know most of these players either so he's still experimenting.  

 

Granlund is a top-6 player for Nashville.  They aren't going to find someone to replace him if he's their trade chip.  I think they are better off to just try and get a late round pick and be done with his cap hit for next season.  Gives them more flexibility in the off-season rather than take a contract back.   Promoting from the bottom-6 doesn't make them better.  I don't know that they can turn their season around.  

 

I am not sure that their set-up on D is efficient.  Stecher is an upgrade over Irwin/Weber but he's still over 2M cap hit to play 10-12minutes a night.  Irwin/Weber are UFAs and doubtful to get extended.  

 

Fabbro right now is raw and his inexperience shows at times.  He is maybe better suited to be a D5 for now.  Jones was playing with Volchenkov on the 3rd pairing but still played some 20 minutes.  He was on special teams and would take shifts with other Ds too.

 

Ekholm-Subban was their shutdown pairing but with Fabbro they can't be that.  It puts more strain on Josi-Ellis.  If they add a D4 and put Fabbro on the 3rd pairing they might have better balance.  

 

A few years back speed, mobility on D was a competitive advantage for Nashville.  Now teams are just as fast if not faster.  They also have mobile Ds and some have added physicality to that mobility.  Nashville seems to lack some toughness in the top-6 and on D.  Stecher seems just too expensive and not really bring the elements they seem to be missing.  

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by mll

[aGENT]

56 minutes ago, mll said:

I am not sure that their set-up on D is efficient.  Stecher is an upgrade over Irwin/Weber but he's still over 2M cap hit to play 10-12minutes a night.  Irwin/Weber are UFAs and doubtful to get extended.  

 

Fabbro right now is raw and his inexperience shows at times.  He is maybe better suited to be a D5 for now.  Jones was playing with Volchenkov on the 3rd pairing but still played some 20 minutes.  He was on special teams and would take shifts with other Ds too.

 

Funny, this is why I figured Stecher for a good fit. He's capable enough to play 2nd pair in spurts (like when Fabbro is struggling) and isn't bound to be too expensive to be a 2nd/3rd pair tweener (cost controlled RFA). Especially with Fabbro still making ELC cash. They can shuffle them between those pairs as required (Fabbro likely seeing the lion's share of 2nd pair minutes).

 

Add Dillon (or similar) on the left to replace Hammer and that's a sizable improvement where they need it IMO.

 

Baer at 50% gives them a warm body to replace Granlund's poor fit/disappointing production at F and allow them to ease in/make Tolvanen/Tomasino earn it over him. If he get's waived, he's only a +/- $500k hit (short term/1 more year) with that retention. All while offering them injury depth as well.

Edited January 22, 2020 by aGENT

[theo5789]

14 minutes ago, mll said:

 

The risk is tying 4.375M + circa 2.5M in players that are not going to change their fate going forward.   That's a lot of cap for bottom of the lineup players.  Hynes wants to play differently than Laviolette.  They are still working through system adjustments.  

 

In the off-season maybe they want to change the bottom of their lineup but there's just so little time until the TDL.  Hynes doesn't know most of these players either so he's still experimenting.  

 

Granlund is a top-6 player for Nashville.  They aren't going to find someone to replace him if he's their trade chip.  I think they are better off to just try and get a late round pick and be done with his cap hit for next season.  Gives them more flexibility in the off-season rather than take a contract back.   Promoting from the bottom-6 doesn't make them better.  I don't know that they can turn their season around.  

 

I am not sure that their set-up on D is efficient.  Stecher is an upgrade over Irwin/Weber but he's still over 2M cap hit to play 10-12minutes a night.  Irwin/Weber are UFAs and doubtful to get extended.  

 

Fabbro right now is raw and his inexperience shows at times.  He is maybe better suited to be a D5 for now.  Jones was playing with Volchenkov on the 3rd pairing but still played some 20 minutes.  He was on special teams and would take shifts with other Ds too.

 

Ekholm-Subban was their shutdown pairing but with Fabbro they can't be that.  It puts more strain on Josi-Ellis.  If they add a D4 and put Fabbro on the 3rd pairing they might have better balance.  

 

A few years back speed, mobility on D was a competitive advantage for Nashville.  Now teams are just as fast if not faster.  They also have mobile Ds and some have added physicality to that mobility.  Nashville seems to lack some toughness in the top-6 and on D.  Stecher seems just too expensive and not really bring the elements they seem to be missing.  

 

Stecher could handle bigger minutes than Irwin or Weber and thus could ease Fabbro's minutes. They could balance out their ice time based on if Fabbro is having a good game. Getting a strictly D4 is not going to be cheap unless they are bargain bin shopping. He's not a physical specimen because of his size, but he certainly plays bigger than his size indicates. If we weren't tight against the cap ourselves, I'd re-sign him back to our team (hoping that maybe he even takes a pay cut to stay).

 

Granlund might be had for a late pick with 50% retention. So we will see how this plays out. Nashville's window will only be for so long for them to throw out a season. Rinne's time is almost up.

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

He's not a physical specimen because of his size, but he certainly plays bigger than his size indicates. If we weren't tight against the cap ourselves, I'd re-sign him back to our team (hoping that maybe he even takes a pay cut to stay).

Amen to that.