-
Posts
5,665 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by kloubek
-
I didn't hear that, but I would do Guddy for Marner in about half a second. Imagine: Pettersson, Marner, Boeser, Dahlen, Horvat, Lind That's a lot of high end talent. Then of course: Baertschi, Gadjovich, Gaudette, Gagner, Eriksson, Virtanen, Sutter, Granlund. That's about two forwards too many in total, but that's not a bad selection to make up the bottom 6.
-
Hey now - I certainly disputed being so sure Horvat going to be a good 1st line center at some point, but claiming he is a 3rd is totally off base. Here's a few facts for you: Naslund, Bertuzzi and the Sedins all had a noticeable jump in their stats at 24 and 25. It is not unusual for a player to take a few years to hit their stride. Yes, some have ridiculous rookie years (Boeser) but generally speaking, development happens over a few. To compare his current stats to other players in their prime is irrelevant. At 22, he is scoring at around 55 points a season. That's better than the vast majority of players who become excellent, first line players - including the ones from our own Canucks past above. I'm not saying he WILL be one - jury is still out, but the potential is there and we have to wait and see. There are stats online, but apparently in today's NHL, 2nd line centers typically score between 39 and 55 points. This puts Horvat at the high end of a 2nd liner as it stands. You talk about on a good team, but if the range goes as high as 55 points across all teams then that's about as good as it gets. (3rd line typical average range is 31 to 39 by the way). Now, even though we try to roll our lines more than most, decreasing atoi slightly isn't going to drop him to the bottom of that range.. maybe knock him down to 52-53, which is still really, really good. And again, he's 22. I'm not going to lie - I'm kind of sick of people on here 1) Acting like they are clairvoyant and know exactly whether a player will develop or not, and 2) Ignoring even the most basic facts before they spew out their negativity. Bottom line: You're wrong. He's not a 3rd line center now, and he won't likely be going forward. He's already playing like a reasonably high-end second, and although I feel his development "stalled" a bit over the last year, I would be surprised if he didn't improve at least just a bit... which would put him pretty much as a poor-man's 1st line center. (Which is how we play him now anyway) Or better.
-
Complete provides a good opportunity when what you thought was big skill at lower levels doesn’t translate well into the NHL. Same with grit. Both great attributes but not one that alone will make a guy a second liner. That’s, say, a Dowd. To be top six you need translatable-to-NHL offensive skills. I’m not saying he doesn’t have them... I’m just saying it remains to be seen - well before planning on him filling a top six role. If he gets there, I’ll be absolutely thrilled. But for now, I’ll be happy if he is only a true contributor on this team.
-
Never heard that. Interesting - though not relevant for us. I kind of forgot Dahlen was also capable of center. While only a select few WILL play center, I think that speaks to the overall ability for these up and comers to view the ice. If you can't distribute the puck properly, you're not going to be capable of playing that position - but they all are.
-
I can't agree or disagree with whether he will be good enough to be a #2 center - but I WILL say that college hockey is a completely different animal from the NHL, and I don't think the fact he is tearing it up down there means he is destined to be a solid NHL player. There have been plenty of players at the top of that league who never amounted to NHL players at all. On the other hand, there have been some really great players to come out of there as well. I just don't think we have enough information yet to make those kinds of assumptions either way.
-
That's a lofty statement. So I suppose this means you believe Horvat will be our #1 center, and Pettersson will be moved to LW?
-
That's likely what will happen. I'm not sure there is much top 6 pressure any longer. I think everyone realizes the chances of him reaching that potential is slim by this point. As mentioned a page earlier, if he can even be a 3rd liner that puts up points here and there and plays a high energy, physical game - that's about as much as anyone expects now, and I do believe he's capable of that.
-
I will admit, I've seen little of him since he left our team. I guess I'm more basing my opinions on what I saw from him with us - as that clip truly was an outstanding play. (Especially for such a big guy)
-
Tryamkin is an ok defenseman. Decent, but nothing special. His advantage is his size and hitting, and Olympic hockey doesn't lend itself well to running guys and hurting them.
-
Heh. I agree there will be injuries and opportunities. But to start, I actually see Benning re-signing Dowd for the 4th line role and seeing how Gaudette handles the AHL. There is no point in rushing him and shattering the confidence he has built so far. If he lights it up there, then I do see Green bringing him in for the 4th line center. I see Gaudette possibly being good enough to be in the 3rd line center role pretty quickly. That sure helps make Sutter and his 4m+ contract rather expendable. Then we can continue with Dowd on the 4th line and trade Sutter, a roster defenseman and one of our several strong forward prospects in return for a young up and coming offensive defenseman.
-
He won't be our #2 center ever, imo. Horvat is our #2 but he isn't really a "proper" 1st line center. That job I suspect will go to Pettersson, as I just don't see us moving him to the wing. Anyway, I agree that Gaudette and Juolevi will likely both be ready to play on the Canucks next season - but is there going to be room for Gaudette? Almost certainly if we don't re-sign the Sedins but if we do, I wonder if we might play him in the AHL for one season.
-
This isn't saying much, really. Molin was a 4th round pick who couldn't even stick on the Dallas AHL squad.
-
Exactly my opinion. If he can't think the game properly as a forward, he's certainly not going to be able to be one step ahead as a defenseman.
-
Why even do so before the trade deadline then? They can talk about it in the offseason.
-
No kidding. Not sure if this should be taken to indicate they would be open to it, or if they just expect they might be asked to waive. It would be challenging to trade them to a contender. They have to go as a pair, and what contender has 14m lying around? The ONLY way I could see it happening is if we got an asset but took a bad contract as well. I'm not reading too much into this though. They plainly said they didn't want to go anywhere else and I have to assume that hasn't changed. I also have to assume management will respect that; not like they really have a choice with the clauses in effect.
-
I don't actually thing he's that weak. He's just not built. (At all). Watching him play he actually seems reasonably effective as shaking of checks, etc.
-
Boeser is improving, but he's pretty darn slippery so he's never really needed to be able to fly as much as others. He just slips into position and then releases that shot. As far as Jake goes - he absolutely has the tools. We've all seen that. I honestly am not sure what is holding him back. He doesn't always make the smart play, I know that - but even still I would have expected him to be more effective than he has been - improvement or not. Right now he's playing a 3rd line role and not even excelling in that role yet so although I agree the style of player he can and should be that could be effective on an upper line, he has a long ways to go to get there.
-
Again, I guess that depends on where you rate a "b" level player. To me, a 1b means a goalie who has low #1 goalie performance. So, not an ideal starter but still capable of it, still largely effective, and good enough to be mentioned in a conversation regarding number one goalies as opposed to backup goalies. The Canucks are about mid-pack in shots against, so without considering quality of shots (and watching the play I can't say I believe we let opposing players get excessive quality shots) that bodes well for a baseline with which to compare Markstrom's stats. What additionally bodes well for the sake of analytics is that Markstom's stats this season are very, very similar to his career stats - which will speak to the consistency of his annual play. Markstrom holds a record this season of 2.72, and .909. (His career stats are 2.86 and .906). Pretty darn close when evened out. Of all goaltenders who have played a dozen or more games this season, his gaa this season ranks as 41st and his his save % ranks 36th. Assuming 30 teams all with #1 goalies and all with backup goalies, his gaa ranks slightly above midpack of backups, and his save % relatively high among backups. This is NOT #1 goalie performance - either in his career nor this season. This puts him in about the top 1/3rd or so of BACKUP goalies. So I'm sorry, but the stats don't support your claim he is a #1 goalie - either a, b, or c. His stats suggest he is clearly a backup - although he is better than most in that capacity. And to me, 4 million a year is not a reasonable price for a backup. Even a good one. I do wonder though - where are your stats that suggest he is a #1 goalie... or is that just your overall "impression"?
-
Ok - I concede your first point. Nielsson's game certainly is about positioning... though he moves well for a big man. I disagree about your assessments/grades though. Without predicting the future and solely going by their performance in the NHL so far, I wouldn't say either look to be starting goaltenders to me. Both decent backups, imo. So therein lies our difference in opinion on salary - whereby you expect to be paying Marky a #1 salary whereas I don't believe he plays at a #1 level.
-
I'm hoping Tryamkin will come back too. He could be an important piece. But there's a whole lot more than just Pettersson, Juolevi and Demko coming. Those are just the ones that we are going to be leaning on heavily to turn out. But there's also Dahlen, Lind, Gaudette, Gadjovich, and possibly Lockwood and DiPietro, and for a long shot, Palmu. If we could get guys like Virtanen to continue improving and maybe Goldobin might be able to put together a more rounded game, we will have far too many NHL-class forwards to even know what to do with.
-
Let's face it guys... we don't have good goaltenders. Both have very high athletic ability, both are big guys, and both more or less technically sound. But the league is getting faster and more skilled, and while they are capable of making good saves, neither are able to do so consistently. In fact, neither have EVER been able to do so consistently. I don't entirely blame them though; it's not like our team as a whole is a defensive juggernaut either, and if it wasn't for Tanev we've be at the bottom of the league in that regard. But I'm not really worried. We are overpaying for Marky for sure, but there are only two seasons after this one and that actually fits ok with when we are going to really need that cap space. Next year we won't and perhaps not even the year after that. Presumably by the end of those two years Demko will be our #1 with at least a full year (or perhaps two) as backup, and Markstrom can re-sign as our backup for half of his current contract.
-
Do you happen to know the quality of centermen in that league as far as faceoffs go? This stat looks great and if it can translate to anywhere close to that in the NHL then we MUST keep him in the center position. With that said, I would imagine that the talent isn't typically NHL-class so not only is this not a huge sample size, but the results are probably skewed to some degree.
-
I think he will be a #3 guy. But if Trymakin doesn't return we don't *need* 3 or 4 prospects, really - although that would be ideal. Elite PMD (Absolutely), Tanev Juolevi, ?1 ?2, ?3 Now, who do we have to fill those #1, 2, and 3 positions currently? Edler, Hutton, Stecher, Del Zotto, Pouliot. So currently, I'd say Edler is still ok as the 4th d-man, between the remaining 4 we can absolutely fill the bottom pairing, while still having Biega for depth. The #1 position *might* see Pouliot there too so it's basically covered. So in fact, we have a glut, and all we are absolutely missing is that #1 elite guy, and that's if Tryamkin DOESN'T return. If he does, he could slot into that #4 position as well (making a that spot a battle between 3 capable guys) and we have even more of a glut. Should God shine down on us, perhaps we get our top guy in this year's draft. Otherwise, we will have to go the trade or UFA route to get the guy we need. Either way, we're really just a single (excellent) player away from having a decent future D so while our d sucks right now, the situation isn't really that dire. We do, however, need to stock the cupboards for the future as they are hopelessly bare of defensive prospects going forward. I can see Holm being a bottom pairing guy, but that's about it. If the above was difficult to follow, consider this: Dahlin Tanev Juolevi Tryamkin Pouliot/Edler Stecher Biega In the end, that may not be the best d in the nhl, but it's far better than what we have now with balanced scoring potential on the left, and defensive/smart/physical guys on the right. We MUST find a way to get some scoring from the blueline or we're simply not going to be a contender again.
-
Who's that... Pettersson? Then we have a glaring deficiency at center. Our top line only has Boeser as an obvious winger, and the LW is still up in the air at this point. We simply cannot afford to give up Pettersson. Love Bo as I do, I just don't believe he's elite #1 material and this team needs that going forward. So me, Pettersson is untouchable. If we are going the trade route I think our only expendable chips we have are in our depth of forward prospects. I feel that we're going to have a clear abundance of middle 6 guys in a couple year's time, and we already have too many bottom to mid pairing d-men as it stands. I feel that we have an opportunity to combine both along with maybe a pick to get that high-talent defenceman we require. But again, the way it is looking we might actually have a shot at a very talented defenceman in the draft. If we did by some grace of God manage to get Dahlin, then it improves our situation dramatically. And, as you point out, if Tryamkin also comes back we end up with a darn strong group. Elite? Maybe not exactly - but far better than most. Hard to say what it would look like, but assuming we don't re-sign Del Zotto, we lose Gudbranson at this TD, Edler doesn't re-sign with us, and we give up on Hutton it still looks like this in 2019-2020: Dahlen Tanev Juolevi Tryamkin Pouliot Stecher Biega That's actually not bad at all.
-
100% agree that we're falling behind for the meshing of maturity. That's why I said that if we are going to get that #1-man, we need to draft him this year; and he's going to have to be elite enough to start contributing quicker than many D typically do. You mention that our already drafted guys will have to make huge steps, but I don't see anybody in our system that CAN make those huge steps except MAYBE Juolevi - who I see as being a #2 guy at best - and the jury is still out as to whether or not he will be remotely that good. I like Stecher, but he's probably a great bottom pairing or at best middle pairing guy in his prime. I like what I saw from Chatfield in preseason, but I fear that was just good luck more than true ability given his 4 points in Utica so far. I guess Holm looks the best of the bunch, but I think the chances of him being the guy we need in the top pairing is slight. For all the fuss many have made about Pouliot, he's a 3 guy at best imo and even that seems a bit of a stretch. Wiercioch? McEneny? Sautner? Cederholm? Nope nope, nope and nope. Partly due to the relatively high amount of talented defensemen in the draft, I say Benning needs to pick the best defensemen available. We have no time left to build our D naturally anymore.