Hindustan Smyl

I would go: 1) Levio or Juolevi for JP (or Leivo and Juolevi for JP + a young middle of the road defense prospect in the Oilers system). 2) Markstrom + one of our defenseman for Talbot + an upgrade over said defenseman that we trade (I was thinking Stecher to Andersson, but it could be anything really.......as long as the upgrade is approximately the equivalent of the downgrade involved from going from Markstrom to Talbot).

[proposal] Jacob Markstrom to Calgary for Cam Talbot + defenseman / A flier on Jesse Puljiujarvi Looking at this Canucks team, I think there are two main areas that we need to address. 1) Another top 6 scoring forward. 2) Another defenseman that is capable of playing on the top 4 incase of injuries (and not being exposed long term as a guy that shouldn't be on your top 4). I think most of us can agree on the following: 1) Trading for a current top 6 forward will cost an arm and a leg. 2) Demko shouldn't be the clear cut #1 taking on a heavy #1 load right now, but he's likely at a point now where he could benefit from getting more starts and maybe even getting 50% of the games. 3) It's important for a team to have atleast two solid goalies. Jesse Puljiujarvi would be a classic case of buying relatively low. Even though he's been a bust at the NHL level so far, the fact of the matter is that many young players have struggled in Edmonton in the past (for whatever reason) only to develop their games elsewhere. While it's only the Finnish league, Puljiujarvi does have 23 points in 20 games thus far. If the Canucks are looking for a guy that could play with Horvat for the short term, Jesse Puljiujarvi might be your guy. To Edmonton: Josh Levio + Olli Juolevi To Vancouver: Jesse Puljiujarvi + middling prospect defenseman I would have suggested someone like Baertschi or Goldobin, but I can't see Edmonton going for that. Oilers would likely ask for Virtanen, but I would say no to that. Two talented prospects that haven't lived up to expectations get fresh starts. Markstrom + defenseman to Calgary for Talbot and *upgrade* defenseman Calgary gets a true #1 goalie, while the Canucks get a 1A goalie that can take pressure off of Demko as the Canucks slowly try and push Demko into the #1 role (or atleast give Demko 50% of the starts). Even with the downgrade from Markstrom to Talbot, the Canucks goaltending position could still be considered a strength since both goalies wouldn't look out of place playing as the #1 goalie for an extended period of time. Since the Canucks, in this hypothetical, would be willing to downgrade their goaltending position, the expectation is that we'd be upgrading our defense. Now - for this one, I'm not sure how it would manifest itself (Troy Stecher to Rasmus Andersson? Fantenberg to Mark Stone?). I'd probably be willing to do the former (Markstrom + Stecher for Talbot + Andersson). Summary: To Edmonton: Josh Leivo + Olli Juolevi To Vancouver: Jesse Puljiujarvi + [middling defensive prospect] To Calgary: Jacob Markstrom + Troy Stecher To Vancouver: Cal Talbot + Rasmus Andersson Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Pearson-Horvat-Puljiujarvi Ferland-Sutter-Virtanen Schaller-Beagle-Motte Roussel Edler-Myers Hughes-Tanev Benn-Andersson Fantenberg Demko Talbot This roster would be under the assumption of 100% full health. This is an entirely different issue that I'm about to bring up, but it looks like the Canucks will have some tough decisions to make when Roussel returns. It would be an injustice of Gaudette got sent down to the A, but then what becomes of Sutter? If you move Sutter to the wing, then which other player comes out of the line-up? If the answer to that is Virtanen, then perhaps Virtanen is one of the guys that you move for Puljiujarvi +.

Any pragmatist/realist? Canucks *will be* a contender in a few years, don’t get me wrong, but this isn’t their year. Rolling the dice and making more short term moves (especially with our cap issues coming up) won’t be worth it. Give Horvat Miller and Virtanen. Put Pearson (smart two way player) with Petey and Brock. That top 6 should be good enough. Let Gaudette and Sutter fart with each on the 3rd line and let them alternate different roles (ie Gaudette plays center but Sutter takes key face offs, etc). 2021-2022. Circle that year on your calendar and remember........you heard it here first.

The problem with trading for a top 6 winger, is that...... 1) it would likely cost too much. 2) The Canucks have Podkolzin and Hoglander waiting in the wings. To me, it seems unlikely that our 2nd line support for Horvat will be an issue for the future. Keep in mind that the Canucks aren’t going to be winning the cup this year anyways. Stay the course, and push hard for the playoffs. A line of Miller-Horvat-Virtanen should be a good enough support system for Horvat. Put Pearson with Pettersson and Boeser.

Like I said at the start of this thread. I don't mind keeping Sutter at all. Any form of depth for this injury riddled team is a good thing, and Sutter can help us when he's healthy. What I don't want however, is Gaudette being sent to Utica OR being deployed as a Winger. Gaudette should be the team's 3rd line Center. And yes - if Horvat isn't producing 5 on 5, then use him to take the tough match-ups. We would still have Beagle as well.

[proposal] Brandon Sutter getting shot out of a cannon into the Pacific Ocean As much as I like Sutter *when he’s healthy* the fact of the matter is that he hasn’t been healthy enough while he’s been here. I’m also now of the opinion that Gaudette should stay up here for good this time. No more biting boners in Utica, and no more playing on the Wings. Gaudette should be the team’s 3rd line C. So the obvious question becomes - what type of trade value does Sutter have around the league? Would the Canucks be better off trying to move him now, or should they move Sutter to the wing? I wouldn’t be opposed to keeping Sutter since he adds to our depth, but *not* if Gaudette gets pushed out of the line-up or onto the Wings. Eriksson and Baertschi are pretty much immovable. What would you do with Sutter, if anything?

Vancouver looks like it’s located in the cat’s sphincter.

You’re probably right. If something like this were to go down, you might have to keep Canada as its own separate division due to the border issues (ie Boston having to spend so much time going through customs, etc.). Another division might have to consist of 9 teams.

That’s a great find. Very interesting. I didn’t even realize that Chicago was atop the list (makes sense though). Good point about convincing those bottom 10 owners. Lots of powerful hockey higher-ups in New York, Toronto, Montreal, etc.

You make great points, but I think the newfound parity has more to do with the OT loser point than it does with the Time Zone divisional alignments. At the end of the day though, I suspect that there’s a significant advantage in being a part of the Metropolitan division than it would be in being a part of the Pacific Division. Road trips to the West aside, those “road trips” that Metro teams have to go on are pretty much next door. That $&!# has to add up over time.

Has there been a noticeable drop in TV ratings whenever East coast teams play West coast teams? (due to the time difference). I haven’t checked, but my gut feeling says no. I would argue that the newer and more interesting match-ups would lead to higher TV ratings of anything.

Baseball style series, in that, they wouldn’t play the 2-3 games all back-to-back. They would get a rest in between days (like in a regular NHL playoffs). Perhaps to compensate for this, there could be larger day breaks between series’? (I.e. after a “series” is completed against a team, you could more days in a row off than teams currently get). Basically - under this new system, teams would work harder but rest harder. If you combine the above with reasonable geographical proximity within road trips, then perhaps the schedule could be even easier (for instance, a team playing 3 games over 6 days against the LA kings in LA......having a 3-4 day break afterwards, and then doing 3 games in 6 nights against the Anaheim Ducks in Anaheim). If the NHL planned it right, perhaps a system like this could be even easier than the current one.

Perhaps this could be combated with longer homestands? Road trips can also be arranged as such that when a team goes out on a road trip, they would stay within the reasonable time zone (for example, a California trip where you play all the California teams). Maybe you could also do something like baseball where when you visit a team, you play an entire series (2 or 3 games in a row in that team’s barn). Playing a “regular season series” against a team would not only make the travel much easier, but could also manufacture more organic rivalries.

Conference and Divisional realignment that would bring equality to the NHL: The Canucks are at a disadvantage in terms of how much they have to travel relative to most other teams. This is one of the reasons why we often struggle with injuries. meanwhile, teams in the Metropolitan division (amongst other divisions) have the easiest (or easier) travel schedules in the NHL and tend to experience less wear and tear on their bodies as the season progresses. I think it would be more fair if all teams had to experience approximately the same travel schedule. I think one way to achieve this, is to align teams from Northernmost to Southernmost as opposed to Easternmost to Westernmost. 1) Patrick’s Division: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Boston. 2) Norris Division: Seattle, Las Vegas, Colorado, Minnesota, Detroit, Chicago, New York Rangers, Buffalo 3) Smythe Division: San Jose, St. Louis, Los Angeles, Columbus, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New Jersey, New York Islanders. 4) Adams Division: Anaheim, Arizona, Dallas, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Nashville, Washington Please keep in mind that these are just off the top off my head. Ideally, you’d have a divisional realignment where the divisions would be classified in a horizontal geographical manner, where teams would be grouped together depending on how far north or south they were (again, my list was off the top of my head and so I have no idea if I made some geographical discrepancies). The NHL can then go old school and bring back the old divisional names (Smythe, Patrick’s, Adams, and Norris). That “Canada Division” with Boston added would be a huge draw for the sport. LA being in the same division with one of the New York teams (ideally the Rangers) would also be big from a marketing standpoint. Perhaps Colorado and Detroit can rekindle their role hatred from decades past? The bottom line here is that a divisional realignment such as this might bring more equality and fairness to the game in terms of the travel schedule. The newer match-ups and newer rivalries might also help take the sport to another level.

His name is MS and he’s on the cesspool known as HF Canucks.

My bad. I forgot about him. ps - Tree will be playing for the Canucks again this season. Book it!

Good points. I gave the edge to the following year since Podkolzin and Hoglander would be here, while many of our younger prospects/playerswould either be making our line-up (Woo, etc.), or coming into their primes a little more (as great as Petey, Quinn, and Brock are, they are still extremely young).

The Canucks will have a great chance of winning the cup in 2021-2022. This is the year that I have marked on my calendar. Why? You may ask: Here’s why: 1) Miller will still be on his “sweetheart” contract. 2) Boeser will still be on his bridge deal. 3) Podkolzin and Hoglander will be here with on ELC deals. Both players are the real deal, and will undoubtedly provide Horvat the necessary 2nd line help that we need. 4) One of Markstrom and Demko will still be here, with Dipietro or a veteran back-up providing back-up. 5) Quinn Hughes: My guess is that Hughes will be signed to a bridge deal a la Zack Werenski style (whatever the equivalent of 5.5 million is at that time). 6) Tyler Myers. Myers will be older, but not old enough to the point where his game will be noticeably worse than it is now. He will still be more or less the same player. 7) Eriksson: Eriksson’s contract will expire in three years, but mark my words: He’ll be gone after this season. Period. 31 of the 36 million will have been paid to Eriksson after July 1st 2020. Retirement might be a realistic option here. I’m not saying that this WILL happen, but I will say that there’s a really good chance. 8) Chris Tanev: I don’t think the Canucks will move Tanev, and will likely keep him at a very similar cap hit (with a longer term being the trade off). 9) Woo and Juolevi should be full time roster players by this point. 10) Elias Pettersson: I think Pettersson is the one guy that will get the huge 8 year deal, but I don’t see us having cap issues at this point. 11) Edler: The Canucks will either re-sign Edler to a one year deal, or will find the Edler equivalent in the off-season prior. Given how expensive top pairing dmen will be however, my guess is that the Canucks will bite the proverbial boner and offer Edler another two year 6 million deal. I can see the Canucks facing cap issues shortly after the conclusion of 2021-2022, but I think 2021-2022 will be our best shot at winning a cup for the immediate future. Please keep in mind that my math is super half-assed here.

I wouldn’t mind trying out Virtanen there, but I’m not sure if he has the smarts or the defensive game to play with Petey and Brock. You never know though. I think Virtanen’s fast and physical game might mesh well with Horvat’s. Miller-Horvat-Virtanen might turn some heads. Pearson-Pettersson-Boeser Miller-Horvat-Virtanen Leivo-Gaudette-Sutter Schaller-Beagle-Eriksson 100% healthy line-up Pearson-Pettersson-Boeser Miller-Horvat-Virtanen Roussel-Sutter-Ferland Schaller-Beagle-Motte Leivo Gaudette and Baertschi go to Utica and help lead the Comets to a championship. Eriksson gets punted off of Grouse Mountain into the Pacific Ocean.

An Eriksson for Kovalchuk swap might also help guys like Tryamkin and Podkolzin assimilate better if and when they come to Vancouver. As others have mentioned, maybe Kovy would get excited about hockey again playing in an old familar role. Kovy's presence on the top line could then allow Miller to play with Horvat, and get Horvat going. Having said all that, I still likely wouldn't make this deal. I still think Eriksson will retire from the NHL after this season. 31 of the 36 million will have been paid to Eriksson after July 1st 2020. 5 million is still 5 million, but I don't think Eriksson would be willing to ride buses for two years just to collect that relatively small amount of money.

Horvat needs help Earlier this season, I had assumed that Horvat and Pearson would be able to carry the 2nd line with whoever, but it’s possible that I was wrong. I’d try this up front. Pearson-Pettersson-Boeser. Baertschi-Horvat-Miller Virtanen-Gaudette-Sutter Schaller-Beagle-Leivo Pearson is smart enough and good enough defensively to play with Petey and Brock. Perhaps Pearson can get his confidence back by playing with the big two. Miller is great in any role, while Baertschi has had previous chemistry with Bo.

The Canucks need to learn how to play against trapping teams.

Fried horse urethra is my preference. Jennifer Lopez or Anna Kournikova? Who would you rather? (and yes, it’s still 1999 in my Hindu world).

Defend boat? If Loui Eriksson farted in a forest but no one was around to smell it, would the fart still stink?

Dwayne for an action movie. Vin Diesel for the Fast and the Furious series.