Hindustan Smyl

Baertschi and Goldobin - The pros and cons of calling them up Baertschi and Goldie have been tearing up the A, while Eriksson continues to take naps in the press box along with Josh Leivo and Michael Ferland looking like misfits. “So why not bring up Baertschi and Goldie?” Is the obvious answer. Not only are Baertschi and Goldie tearing up the A, but they seem to have found some chemistry playing with one another. Correct me if I’m mistaken, but this is the first time that Baertschi and Goldie have been playing together right? (Goldie is being deployed as a RW’er down in Utica). Like I said - the obvious advantage in bringing up one or both Baertschi or Goldobin is that perhaps they could help our inconsistent scoring problem. Perhaps the new found chemistry between Baertschi and Goldobin is a thing? On the flip side of this however, there is an obvious difference between lighting it up in the AHL and being good at the NHL level. History doesn’t seem to support the notion that Baertschi and Goldobin will come up here and make a huge difference. The other thing to consider is this: For years now, this management group has talked about building a winning environment down in Utica since it would be a good environment for the kids to be in. Now that we finally seem to be getting that, we want to break it apart? In two games time, there is a good chance that Adam Gaudette will be sent down to join Baertschi and Goldobin.........which would likely make Utica even more dominant. Gaudette would get tons of ice-time and offensive opportunities. With Goldobin and Baertschi lighting it up in Utica, their trade values will likely continue to increase as well.......meaning that perhaps they could turn into movable assets at some point. The other thing to consider is this: If you bring up Baertschi and say......waive Eriksson, do you really want a passive and sulking Eriksson around the kids in Utica? affecting the positive atmosphere? There’s also a chance that if Eriksson got sent down, he’d likely request to play for the Texas Stars just as Sam Gagner requested you play for the Toronto Marlies. The Hindustan’s verdict: As tempting as it might be to bring up Baertschi and Goldobin, I’d keep them down in Utica unless Eriksson, Motte, and the returning Roussel all get injured. I would also send Adam Gaudette down to Utica in two games’ time. I think there’s something to be said about building up a powerhouse down in Utica and letting our prospects be a part of that. Furthermore, if Baertschi and Goldobin continue to light it up, the chances of another NHL club wanting to trade for them becomes likelier.

I’d try this: Pearson-Pettersson-Miller Schaller-Horvat-Boeser Virtanen-Sutter-Motte Ferland-Beagle-Leivo Edler-Myers Hughes-Tanev Benn-Stecher Markstrom Demko

Eriksson and Gaudette for Ladd and Wilde.

Good point about JPG (I honestly haven’t followed him much lately, but I seem to recall him being really good in the playoffs a few years back). I’m not necessarily talking about JPG per se, but just some 3rd line Center that is a clear upgrade over both Sutter and Gaudette, and is basically an extraneous part on another team (ie said team has two good top 6 centers, and their 4th line C would be considered to be a good 3rd line Center). Something like that. Someone on here mentioned Colton Scissons the other day (which I think would be a good idea), but Scissons just signed a long term sweetheart deal and so I doubt that he’d be going anywhere any time soon.

[discussion] - Would it cost an arm and a leg to upgrade our 3rd line Center position? While it would obviously be nice to be able to trade for another Top 6 RW’er or a Top 4 defenseman, it’s likely an unrealistic pipe dream for the following reasons: 1) It would likely cost the Canucks too many assets to try and trade for such a piece. 2) Top 6 forwards and Top 4 dmen usually come at a high cap hit, and the Canucks will likely be facing some cap storms in the future as is. Having said that, IF the Canucks look like a playoff caliber team this season after a large enough sample size, then there would obviously be a benefit in trying to improve the team short term........while simultaneously not trying to cough up an inappropriately high number of quality assets. So with that in mind, would a good 3rd line Center fit the above description (in terms of not having to give up an arm and a leg while still significantly improving the team?). This of course, is under the assumption that Gaudette needs more time in Utica to sizzle, while playmaking continues to be a black hole for Sutter. How much would it cost to pry away a Jean Gabriel Pageau for instance? Canucks fans often talk about how the Horvat line needs another good winger, but that line still produces reasonably well for us despite its deficiencies (ie Leivo). And like I said earlier, trading for another top 6 winger would likely be a steep price. So - how about a good 3rd line Center? That wouldn’t cost an arm and a leg now would it? What if the Canucks acquired a good 3rd line Center that could win face offs and play shut down hockey (like Sutter), but was also a decent enough playmaker (unlike a Sutter) to the point where that 3rd line would have options. You could make it a pure shut down line as we’re seeing right now, or, you could make it a “second 2nd scoring line,” like seems to be the trend for many elite NHL teams. Maybe having a Center like this would give headway for someone like Baertschi being called back to the Biggs. The bottom line is that a new and upgraded 3rd line Center could possibly get the most out of his wingers (from an offensive production standpoint), which could indirectly help the Canucks take pressure off of our top two lines.

Probably looking at Virtanen + (I don’t fully know the Kings’ needs, but I don’t think they have anyone in the pipeline as far as goaltending prospects go and so they might try and ask for Demko+). Toffoli would be a sweet addition, but not as a rental. The Canucks aren’t anywhere near that stage yet.

Toffoli would be mint, but the Canucks aren’t in a position where they should be giving up young long term assets for short term rentals. I would love to have Toffoli here for the long term, but I don’t think the Canucks would be able to afford him (taking into account that we’ll need to re-up Petey and Hughes within the next two years, while also replacing/extending Edler with an equal calibre dman, as well as extending one of Marky or Demko). Toffoli would have been a bloody awesome though. I just can’t see how we’d be able to afford him long term.

I think you hit the nail on the head there regarding Quinn Hughes. Green should strongly consider putting him on PP1. Since the PP is struggling right now (and no, that’s not a vague reference to erectile dysfunction), it might be in the teams’ best interests to stack up one PP line instead of trying to balance two PP’s. Pettersson-Horvat-Boeser + Myers and Hughes. Leivo’s diaper needs to be changed since he’s clearly been stinking it up down there. Get him of the PP as a whole. PP2 = Pearson-Miller-Ferland + Stecher and Edler.

I love your optimism but we still have a ways to go before we’re even in the top 5. I do think that you are jumping the gun a bit (as you suspect).

I’m not sure what it is about New Jersey’s style of play that we find so difficult. Yes - their style of play i infuriating and frustrating, but other teams manage to win against them. Why can’t we? It’s seems like the ultra defensive teams (NJ/Arizona) gives us heaps of trouble.

Good thread. Although I’d love to see Tryamkin return, it would all depend on the understand that Tryamkin and the Canucks reach. As of right now, the only guys that Tryamkin would replace is Fantenberg......which would make Tryamkin our 7th dman. However, if Tryamkin can be convinced that........... 1) Injuries are inevitable and he’d likely slot in sooner than later. 2) He will have plenty of opportunities to secure a top 6 position and get more ice time if he proves himself then I think a deal can be worked out. As good as the Canucks have looked so far, they still need more depth on defense..........and Tryamkin is a guy that wouldn’t look completely out of place on the top 4 if slotted there for a short time period. I would definitely sign Tryamkin and there is a definite need for him to be here, but communication and complete understanding is vital obviously.

May not be smart enough, but he’s one of the few guys in the league that could keep up with him speed wise. JV would just need to be smart enough to know to go to the net. McHindu and Drai can do all the rest.

How has he looked so far? I noticed that he has one assist in three games and is a minus 3. Has he looked better than his stats indicate?

No, I am not saying that at all. Miller is a smart and crafty player that does a lot of great things. My comment was more in defense of Pettersson and Boeser (ie why they haven’t exactly blown the roof off these past 6 games despite still being close to PPG players).

The water heads over at HF Canucks along with the cult of JD Burke are also responsible for creating the myth that Miller was an overpayment.

Good thoughts. While on that note, I’m wondering if the Canes would be interested in something less dramatic? Like a Baertschi or a Goldobin for Roland Mckeown type deal?

Motte has earned the right to stay on this team. That is one hell of a 4th line that we have right now. I love Gaudette, but he’s the odd man out in my opinion. Send him to Utica and give him top line minutes. Let him, Baertschi, and Goldobin dominate down there on a line together.

I’m not sure If it’s a case of “everyone catching up to Miller,” as it’s a case of, “opposing defensemen and shut down centers are overcommitting to Petey and Brock which is allowing Miller to be freed up.” if you’ve noticed, a few of Millers’ goals this year has been from him being wide open in the slot and ripping it. There’s a reason why he’s often so “wide open.”

McCann took Hutton’s mom out to a nice Seafood restaurant......and then never called her back!

Eriksson and Goldie aren’t top 6 NHL’ers, but they aren’t the worst options in the world to use up there in case of injuries. I like Virtanen a lot more than you think (see my above post).

I’m not sure if this is a troll response or a serious response, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think lowly of Virtanen at all. Although he’s had a long road, he clearly has some potential to be great. Given that many of our best players in franchise history (Twins, Naslund, Bertuzzi, etc.) took an exponential leap in their games during their mid-to-late 20’s, of course I know that Virtanen could take an exponential leap as well. All I’m saying is this: 1) We seem to have an over abundance of depth up front (ie Roussel, Gaudette, Eriksson, Baertschi, and Goldobin Incase of injuries). 2) From my point of view, I think one can make a strong case for the fact that we still need some more defensive depth.......especially when you consider the injury histories of Tanev and Edler. In my opinion, the Canucks need another solid Top 4 dman as an insurance policy. Someone that is a clear upgrade over Stecher and Benn, as I don’t see Stecher and Benn being viable long term top 4 options Incase we have injuries......although I like both dmen very much. Now obviously - I would love to trade a popcorn fart like Goldobin or Eriksson to land such a piece, but it ain’t happening. So - if the Canucks need another dman, who is a good bargaining chip? My vote would be for Virtanen........not because I think Virtanen is a lost cause, but because, I realize how much potential he has and other GM’s likely recognize that as well. Trade Jake for the defensive equivalent of Jake (ie young talented dman that could still break out) was my suggestion. In order to receive something of value, you have to give.

Yes - Bertuzzi should absolutely get the ROH treatment. Even if it was for a brief 18 month- 2 year stretch (or however long it was), Bertuzzi could make a legit claim to not only being the best player on the Canucks and possibly the league, but one of the most dominant physical forces in NHL history. It really is a shame that his body started to break down. The Moore incident also clearly affected him mentally and so these two contributing factors lead to his decline.

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser = the “lotto” line? 6-40-9 ps - this isn’t my idea btw. It was suggested on another forum. Whatchy’all think?

I agree for the most part, but I don’t know..... Perhaps it’s PTSD after having watched this team for the past for years, but I don’t expect Edler and Tanev to be healthy all season. I just don’t. I expect both guys to miss at lest 10 weeks each at some point......perhaps even at the same time. If that were to happen, you’d have Hughes-Myers Benn-Stecher Juolevi-Fantenberg As your top 6. Again, I’m just assuming a worst case scenario. Based on the above, perhaps the Canucks could use one more very solid dman? What do you think?

1) I like your Stecher idea a lot. If it works from a cap perspective, I’m definitely in. 2) Fair enough point about Marky and Demko.