ruilin96
-
Posts
4,709 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by ruilin96
-
-
To me the biggest mistake JB made in his tenure as the Canucks GM are the 2 following moves:
1). Louie Eriksson signing.
2). Overvalue of Erik Gudbranson
I don't think JB envisioned Eriksson to declined this significantly after his 30-goals season in Boston. He probably expected atleast 20 goals and 50 points productions in the first few seasons of this contract and clearly it hasn't been the case. Right now Louie is taking up $6 million in cap space and clearly these money could be better spent else where to address either scoring at the top 6 level or offense from the back end.
I think JB overvalued Gudbranson right from the beginning. At the time we acquired him, Gudbranson was 24, RHD who plays physical/throw-back style of hockey. JB was trying to address both physicality and depth on the blueline by acquiring Gudbranson. He saw Gudbranson as someone who can be an anchored of the Canucks blueline going forward. He saw Gudbranson eventually develops into atleast a #3 D-man. Unfortunately, Gudbranson is better off as a #5/#6 D man. At the time JB didn't see the trend of the modern NHL D-man are trending towards speed and skill, and Gudbranson's play style just doesn't fit the current era of hockey. Gudbranson would of been great during the dead-puck era, and he just isn't suited for this new era of hockey nor can he be the go to guy on the blue line. He is better off as a depth and supporting D-man.
If anything, it has shown that JB has learned his lesson. Since Eriksson, JB has stop throwing around money/term on the big fishes at the UFA market, he just brings in depth guys in short to mid-range terms.
He realized his mistake with Gudbranson and in the 2018 draft, he shows that he understands the trends current NHL style D-man and drafted Quinn Hughes.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, Roberts said:
Kamloops and Kelowna will have a tiebreaker game Tuesday in Kamloops to decide who plays the Royals in round 1.
http://whl.ca/article/blazers-rockets-to-meet-in-2019-whl-tiebreaker-game
I read this and in the article it saids the tie-breaking game will be played in Kamloops because Kamloops held the edge in regular season head to head meeting in points earned between the 2 teams. If that's the case, why not just have Kamloops clinched the playoffs? Why play a tie-breaker?
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I will vote for him to be the unsung hero for the Canucks this season.
-
1
-
1
-
3
-
2 hours ago, cyoung said:
Wouldn't hurt to play another year in the NCAA, we shall see though.
If he play another year in the NCAA he could bail on us because he will become a UFA on Aug. 15th, 2020. Not saying he would, but you don't want to risk losing a prospect for nothing. If he feels like he is ready, we could bring him in this year as well. Regardless, I feel like it's best for him to play in the AHL next season.
-
1
-
-
I do analytics tracking for the Everett Silvertips during their games since January, and having watched majority of their games, I think a D-man Canucks can try and target at the 3rd or 4th round is Gianni Fairbrother. He is a good skater, effective in carrying the puck in zone entries. He is a September b-day, which means after this year's draft he can return to WHL for another season then he would be AHL eligible. I could see him eventually develop into a top 4 NHL D-man.
https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/350216/gianni-fairbrother
-
1
-
2
-
-
On 3/3/2019 at 7:46 PM, 112 said:
The kid's never going to have an NHL career.
Hey, can I have the winning number for the next 649 draw since you must have been able to foresee the future.
-
44 minutes ago, Roberts said:
the Royals will either be facing Kelowna or Kamloops in round 1. Kelowna currently has a 58-52 point lead on Kamloops, however, Kamloops has 2 games in hand on Kelowna.
I hope Kamloops makes it and bump out Kelowna (it's unlikely). We just never beat Kelowna... Also this year we aren't that good we just benefit from playing on a weaker division.
-
I love hearing this interview between Juice and Burr:
-
2
-
-
Gudbranson and McCann ended up on the same team after all.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, stawns said:
definite possibility, but you can't see anything that would attrat him to the Canucks?
Whatever attracts him to come here won’t entice him enough.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
This is just TSN trying to get fans talking. I don't see Panarin coming to a Canadian city at all in the summer. Toronto won't be able to afford him with their cap situation. I will be super surprise if he even considers Vancouver an option. He will probably go back to Chicago.
-
1
-
4
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I hope the Leafs get ousted in the first round again this year.
-
1
-
7
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
4 hours ago, Crabcakes said:Juice still cares about the Canucks kids even he no longer plays for us. He is a true Canuck. Also I remember him said something like this the other day: "I have played 0 game this season and I am at the All-Stars and Ryan Kesler has played 45 and he is not here."
-
5
-
1
-
7
-
15 minutes ago, Phat Fingers said:
Boston scouted Pastrnak, JB was obviously familiar with Bostons draft plan. I often wonder if JB was allowed to be hired in Vanvouver with an agreement not to take players on Bostons list. Pure speculation, but he was hired two weeks prior to the draft, no way he doesn't know who Boston was after.
It was reported that JB lit Thomas Gradin and the European's scout on fire a year after the 2014 draft for missing on David Pastrnak. So JB listen to the input of the scouting staffs he had and made the picks accordingly.
-
56 minutes ago, Westcoasting said:
I don't know if you seen my question earlier... any idea why the TSN top prospect list no longer has Juolevi in the top 50? I seen a number of guys that were in last years list and still on this years or moved positions either way... but Olli is gone now! Why... is it his play this year or what?
I don't take TSN prospect rankings too seriously. A lot of it has to do with other prospects improving their stock. Juolevi was rank top 50 last season because he was expected to make the Canucks roster this season. However, he had off-season back surgery, so the plan for him after that is to spend half a season in AHL and then gets called up to play full-time at around this point of the season. Unfortunately for him, he suffered a knee injury and has a season ending surgery. He only played 18 AHL games this season, His sample size is too small, and TSN probably thinks other players have passed him. He has had a very good year in Finland last season, and his AHL stats have been really good. It's too bad he doesn't get any breaks with injuries. I really hope these injuries don't derail his development because I still believe he is a very smart defenseman and a very underrated prospect.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Hamhuis Hip Check said:
Horrible timing for me, im going to the game on the 13th, was really hoping to see him play but his future is way more important
3 hours ago, aGENT said:Crap luck. Got tickets for DET in the 20th, hoping he's back for mine!
I am going to both of these games as well. Will see what happens then.
-
8 minutes ago, gameburn said:
If the Canucks make the playoffs, does this mean Hughes is available to play in them? If so, will he make a big difference?
Assuming Hughes's college team loses out, we will get him sometime around mid-March. He would definitely be eligible for the playoffs should the Canucks make it. It could be the wildcard on our team.
-
1
-
-
I was at last night’s game and here are my thoughts on Quinn Hughes’s Game:
- He is a very good skater, both with and without the puck. He knows how to turn and make room for himself to make a play.
- Tremendous hockey sense, and is really good at keeping the play on-side when opposing team is trying to exit the zone.
- He had quite a few good passes and plays in the offensive zone but his teammates didn’t finish most of his set ups until the one assist he had in the last minute of the game.
- He did have that blatant turnover that led to Sweden’s 3rd goal. He saw the Swedes were changing, and he was hoping to carry the puck into the o-zone and go for a goal. I understand the rationale behind this play, US was down 2-0, he was taking a risk that if he can carry it into the o-zone, he could have a chance to score a goal and get his team back into the game.
- He was actually much more conservative in his play when the game was still close. He doesn’t try to do those solo rushes by carrying the puck into the o-zone himself, rather he often skates the puck to the neutral zone then passes off the one of his forwards to let them do the zone-entry (most of the time).
- He could work harder on his shot, as I think if he can shoot the puck harder and pick the corners a little bit, he could improve his goal-scoring total both in this tournament or in his college season. However, he is a play maker first and he can often pass the puck to the forwards at prime position to shoot.
- Overall, I thought he played a good game.
-
4
-
-
7 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:
That is a Pettersson like snipe!
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Thought he was one of the best team USA forwards after the 1st period.
-
5
-
2 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:
I am sticking with my "gut" with Tkachuk for now. Plus he is a great player to "hate" on another roster.
BTW the Canucks brass did not interview Matt in the lead up to the draft that year.
IMO they clearly wanted PLD and when he was taken early they went with a player that would need time to physically develop.
Matt was never on their radar, even though he was a Knight and was likely ready to step in right away.
If the reports are true about his salary demands, then it would reinforce my supposition that he has the traits if his father in ways I would not want in the nucks locker room.
One player gets greedy, it can feed into the team culture. I would like to see Bo be the major influence on our young roster vs Matt. Added to that hindsight is always 20/20. I had these concerns at the draft. I still think there is validity to my 'gut'.
Character is a major component to JB's team building. Give me Brock over Matt any day. Since Brock was already our prospect, the team could look to other needs like center in defence. Finding wingers to compliment our centers and defenders is likely the easier position to draft.
Jake has taken a long time to put things together, but I believe he can play a similar role on our roster. Lind, Gads and possibly MacEwan could also become that player.
Matt is a good player. He has a team that already had its key players on its roster Matt was the last piece in many ways. IMO he isnt the driver that some believe. He benefits from the top line. Calgary also has an enviable defence, good and deep.
I like Matt's play around the net. That's why Gads was such a positive draft pick. He plays a similar game.
Having a MT at 8-9 million, what would Jake, Brock, EP40 and Quinn sign for. It could add 1million per player. The flames are lucky that their key players are already under contract. But that attitude could be destructive in our team at this point.
That is the main reason I was and am happy that MT went elsewhere.
Same here, even before the 2016 draft, I did not want the Canucks to take Tkachuk because of the person he is. I am willing to bet that when things go south for the Flames in a few years, Tkachuk could pull a Kesler, demanding a trade while providing only a 2 team list.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:
How did Scott do tonight? Better or worse than dipietro?
The goals he gave up look a lot worse than Dipietros. Dipietro actually played a pretty solid game tonight. However, it is still uncertain who will be the #1 because Tim Hunter had already said each goalie will get a game in the first 2 games. It is game 3 of the group games when we will know who will be our starter.
-
This isn't good. I hope this doesn't effect his play long term. I still think he is very underrated, and isn't appreciated more by fans because of the style he plays and the guy drafted after him. I think a healthy Juolevi can one day be 40+ point d-man in the NHL, but now with these injuries, we likely won't see the best of Juolevi which is too bad. Again, even if there is a redo in the 2016 draft, I still DON'T want Tkachuk. Never liked him even when I was browsing through all the prospects available.
-
5 hours ago, UticaHockey said:
I get a chuckle when I read comments that DiPietro is a better prospect than Demko. Everyone loves the shiny newer toy.
I expected Thatcher to look rusty after missing two months with a concussion but he hasn't missed a beat. If anything he looks more technically sound and is staying up longer and not giving up the goals over his shoulder.
Agreed. I think both will turn out to be great goalies and we will have a decision to make on whether to keep Demko or DiPietro like the Ducks had to with Andersen or Gibson. DiPietro being a few years younger would mean that early stages, we will see Demko as starter and DiPietro as back-up. And eventually, when DiPietro demonstrates starting potential, that's when we will make the difficult decision.
I also expect Demko to have a rough first season or two in the NHL as he was finding ways and the members on this board will make proposals to trade him or want him gone. Then he will play lights out and the same guys who made those proposals will be calling him the backbone to our future Stanley Cup.
Olli Juolevi | #48 | D
in Alumni
Posted · Edited by ruilin96
Agreed. Although the 2011 team didn’t have a #1 D (as in the Norris nominee level), they had 4 top pairing quality D-man in Edler, Erhoff, Hamhuis and Bieksa. Salo at that point would be 2nd pairing D-man on most other teams is on our 3rd pair. If only we brought back Willie Mitchell, it would of completely solidify our 6 D man. Our weak-link that year were Ballard/Aaron Rome as our #6 and #7 D. Our #8 D for the majority of the season would be Andrew Albert. Looking at this, the drop off was pretty significant after Salo. If we would bring back Willie Mitchell.