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

Fanuck

Members
  • Posts

    7,188
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Fanuck

  1. I wouldn't be completely opposed to this but I don't see it myself. If you're expecting a top 3 pick in return you've limited your scope of teams that you're going to trade with, additionally you've got to ask yourself, of the bottom 10 teams in the league (or whatever it is that is eligible to win the drafty lottery and move into that draft position), who would want a player like Miller/why would said team not want their own pick and build around their own 'superstar'/ who could afford to re-sign a player like Miller/ would Miller even want to re-sign with a bottom-feeder team? These unknowns make this scenario (trade for a top 3 pick) less likely in my view - not zero chance, but less likely than trading him to a contending team trying to 'get over the top'.
  2. What problem are you referring to? No, I'm not being sarcastic - people have different views about what the issue is with this club.
  3. Of all the teams at our level or below in the standings in the entire league, I'd say only 1 has as good a starting goalie as we do and that's Anaheim. So in that sense, yes, I'd say that makes it different - we rely on our starting goalie more than most, way more I'd say.
  4. FTFY. I think it's crystal clear that Demko, and only Demko is the one player this team depends on night-in, night-out. If he plays like Demko we're in every single game. If he plays even a 'normal' game we typically don't stand a chance. Everyone else on the team can bring their game or not, but if Demko doesn't show up we're done before we even start.
  5. At this point I'm essentially considering our chances over. If that changes I'll be pleasantly surprised and buy a lottery ticket that night.
  6. I mean eventually, at some point, Buffalo will be good, no?
  7. It's low risk for sure, but it's not zero risk. For example, since it's a one-way deal, someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but let's say Martin doesn't show for whatever reason that he can handle a regular workload for a b/u at the next level, and you have to send him to Abby, then he needs to clear waivers on a one-way contract. He could be claimed and we'd lose this asset for nothing. So there is some risk, not a lot, but not zero.
  8. For a guy who's never played more than 3 NHL games in one season in his entire career, let's hope he's capable of playing substantially more than that. It'd be ideal if he could play between 15-20 games or so at a high level.
  9. Myers probably wouldn't do anything to someone roughing up Petey, Schenn on the other hand likely wouldn't need much motivation to jump on anyone getting in Petey's face.
  10. Sad fact, Canucks could've drafted Wilson, instead we got Jere Gillis. No offense to Jere.
  11. Am I missing something? Admittedly, I just drop in/out of this thread randomly. Miller is currently 29yo and having a career-year. He is signed for one more year meaning he'll be 30 when his current deal expires. It was suggested we re-sign him for 8 years meaning he'll be 38 if he played out that full contract here.
  12. Agree. I imagine it would give JR quite a boost heading into the Caldar Cup playoffs. Who knows, we're going to get eliminated soon - accept it people - and they'll have plenty of time to give a few guys an 'audition' if they want to.
  13. They could dress Rathbone as the 13th forward in an emergency call-up if they really wanted to I'm guessing. Would be 'out of the box' thinking, but I'm suspecting they still believe there's a chance at PO so they'll ice the 'best' lineup they can given who's available. If we were already 'mathematically' eliminated I suspect we'd be seeing a different strategy the next few weeks.
  14. Do we really want that contract on the books when Miller is 38yo? Let me guess, Miller will be one of those rare players who is as productive at 38 as they are at 29 - who is that again........?
  15. That's a lot of speculation, but let's just for arguments sake believe it's legit - this all but means he's going to be traded. Miller would be leaving multiple millions on the table if he took that deal from Vancouver and he'd likely need to put up with several more seasons of 'mediocrity' on the ice as well if he stayed here.
  16. Your plan addresses the aging, largely unskilled (obvious exception of QH) defence, with virtually no depth in the organization exactly how?
  17. Lol, the kid lives and plays down the road and is having a great season, he's leading all Abby dmen in scoring, he's watched numerous teammates get called up and can now be rewarded himself with his own callup, and you think he's being rushed. It's not like he got put on the roster when he was 18.
  18. I would go further to say that any success depends entirely on Demko right now. When he steals games we have a hope - or at least we are competitive as far as the scoreboard goes, when he plays even 'normal' we don't stand a chance. Doesn't matter what OEL/Huggy/Petey/Miller or anyone else is doing, if Demko doesn't play out of this world we can't compete. This is not how a competitive team is built - I hope Allvin/JR understand this because a certain portion of CDC is adamant that this club is a few moves away from being competitive, which is absurd in my view. I'm not saying we pull an Ottawa and have a tire-fire, but there needs to be substantial changes in on-ice personnel in order for this club to improve.
  19. If we trade Boeser we need a young defenseman coming back, not a punk with a big mouth who won't back it up.
  20. Yeah, I've heard that criticism of BB before. I think he's proven he can coach, I'd like to see what he could do with a full season myself.
  21. I agree, sadly I think of all our assets Boeser is unfortunately the most expendable one. He's a great human, but as far as that QO goes, it's prohibitively expensive as is signing him long term below his QO. If rumors were true we should've dealt him to NJ for a young d-man.
  22. If I'm not mistaken, we need to get to the playoffs before getting through them, no?
  23. I don't classify those signings as 'big' in the sense that they were 'no brainers', they were going to be signed one way or another regardless of who was in charge. They weren't 'big' decisions, that was always going to get done - it wasn't a hard decision in any way for management/ownership so sign those players. This summer is big in the sense that there is a brand new regime in charge of this club and their decisions will indicate the direction this club will take for the next generation of players. There will be difficult decisions to be made and their moves, or lack thereof, will set a tone for fans/players and give us a good indication of what to expect long-term in my view. To me, that is what I interpret as big.
×
×
  • Create New...