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

JM_

Members
  • Posts

    52,426
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    104

Everything posted by JM_

  1. good thing we have the most experienced president of hockey op's in the league. Yeah its risky no matter which way this thing goes.
  2. I like our young guys but there's no chance they cover 100 pts on their own, and have their own production. Is Hughes going to have a 120 pt season?
  3. I understand the 2 year idea, just think its actually the most risky path in terms of not improving.
  4. Sometimes you have to take away a coaches favourite toy.
  5. its the timing. Outside of the top 5 in most drafts you're looking at 3-4 years before a kid can make an impact.
  6. the only Miller trade deal proposal I've liked is the NJ 2nd oa deal, or maybe Philly for 5th oa. Thats the only ones where we're getting the chance at an elite player, but even at 5th this year thats a stretch. We'd have to go out and spend big in free agency to replace Millers scoring but then we'd have the 2nd oa too.
  7. good point, that does make tanking difficult. So no elite picks then. Can you do a youth rebuild with no more elite picks?
  8. I wonder if the hang up is year 7 or maybe even 8 of an extension. I think JR would pull the trigger on 6 but the deal has to be under 8 AAV. But if Miller is going to do that lower AAV, he'd want security of 7 or 8 years. I don't believe any team we trade him to is going to give him a 7 year deal tho. He's risking a lot by not agreeing to something reasonable here, thats the big stick in this negotiation imo and I think JR is willing to wait him out on it. And Kadri is also out there muddying things. Strome too to a lesser extent.
  9. I just want to see a firm direction. I'm OK with the youth build idea too, but would prefer to see us dive for a year or two then. If we moved everyone over 25 then the ages would align a lot better for that window. We'd need to tank to have top 5 pick potential, and we could use the picks from moving Bo, Miller, Myers, Pearson, Garland for later round picks on d and maybe even a Demko replacement. What I don't want to see is something in-between, where we move the best piece of this current group and don't really get elite back.
  10. my rose coloured beer googles for this team mostly come from Demko, I think he's got the ability for a deep run. Bubble Demko is real. The prospect rebuild is a 4 year job imo, and won't have much of an impact on this current core group, Hughes is the only one signed long enough to see that materialize.
  11. thanks for posting this, its good to see the actual numbers occasionally.
  12. draft can be the more sensible way to go.... unless you're Buffalo or AZ. I'd really like to see what we can do by moving Pearson, Myers, Garland in terms of exchanging them for better fits for this team. Could we get the d group we need to compete by moving these guys? maybe? how do we look e.g., if we can turn these three into Marino and Manson? is that a legit top 4 pairing in the playoffs? Hughes-Marino OEL-Manson
  13. I'm hoping we can get Marino for Garland but thats me being a homer.
  14. I really like the idea of adding this guy, but oof thats a lot of the cap. Our new mega-front office would really have to be high on him.
  15. trades and UFAs, no other option if you want a playoff team with this current core. Doing it via the draft will take 3-4 years, which ages out Miller, Bo, OEL and Demko's contract, hence the need for a blow up if we're going to go that way. Just moving Miller won't be enough.
  16. Petey goes 2 or 3 in a 2017 redraft. Same with Hughes. We stole Demko. Miller is playing like a top 5 pick producer.
  17. I guess if we're looking to create cap space? otherwise I think we can do a lot better than a Liljegren, heck if we're interested in smallish right side d we might as well do the NYR trade for Lundkvist. Pagnotta has Garland linked to Boston, Toronto, Edmonton, New Jersey, Seattle, Columbus, Pittsburgh so there's a lot of options there.
  18. unravelling Benning's gaffes is the hard part.... but we did just did that with Boeser. Almost 1 mil under his QO for 3 years, thats some nice negotiating and puts Brock on the deal he should have been on in the first place. I think where we differ is I do think with some more shrewd moves like this, that the Canucks can be something akin to a LA or St. Louis type contender. I don't think we've seen the best of Petey, Boeser, Hughes yet. The heavy lifting imo is fixing that d group. Can PA/JR do that in one cycle of draft and free agency over the next 10 days?
  19. I was just wondering, he doesn't have any trade protection so I was just curious.
  20. maybe, but Poolman might not play for us again. He needs to be offloaded yesterday to a bottom feeder.
×
×
  • Create New...