-
Posts
5,665 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by kloubek
-
Insider information: - In light of the poor start and fans breaking allegiance so quickly, effective immediately, jerseys will now be locked to the person with a chain as to avoid ending up on the ice. The lock will be released upon exit. - It will no longer be permitted to claim to support the team, then abandon it before the halfway mark of the season. Doing so exempts you from being a fan until the following season.
-
I think this is a fine return for a 5th. We really needed another capable body on D, and this provides it. And as a secondary upside, we now have 3 guys who will be called "Pederson" by the announcers. I just can't wait for: "Elias Pettersson to Pederson, to Pettersson and back to Pettersson and he{Pettersson} scores!!!!"
-
[PGT] Vancouver Canucks at Seattle Kraken | Oct. 27, 2022
kloubek replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Hope Millsy is OK. -
[Discussion] Do You Have the Stomach For a Rebuild?
kloubek replied to Warhippy's topic in Canucks Talk
In my mind, we have room for one top 4 guy - preferably a mobile yet strong defensive guy to compliment Hughes. This allows OEL and Myers to man the 2nd pairing, which I believe is at least completely adequate. That only leaves our bottom pairing, which I also feel is adequate. We aren't moving Hughes, and OEL's contract is next to impossible to lose. They are also two solid players - even if OEL isn't playing quite to his cap hit. After getting a partner for Hughes, that's already 3/6 set. Myers isn't playing to his salary either, but he isn't a bad player and an adequate 3rd d-man or possibly a top-end 4th. That's 4/6. Then there's Schenn who is really best suited as a 3rd pairing guy but does well in that role. 5/6. That leaves Rathbone, Poolman, Stillman, and Burroughs to fight it out for the last spot, which I think is perfectly acceptable. 6/6. It's not quite this simple due to handedness, but you catch the idea.... So again, while it would be nice to have more star power on the blueline, I don't think we are overall in horrible shape. Trade one of our many forwards for a permanent partner for Hughes, which allows everyone else to shift down into roles where they aren't given more responsibility than they can handle. Also, if our offense can get on track, we should easily be in the top half of the league for scoring which means more time on the offensive zone and less time in our own zone. This in itself should boost the defensive performance of the team in general, and would help take the pressure off the D and Demko alike. I think we would be just fine. That is, on paper. At the end of the day, this team needs to figure out why they are performing so poorly. Without that, no retool or revamp is likely to make all the difference. -
[Discussion] Do You Have the Stomach For a Rebuild?
kloubek replied to Warhippy's topic in Canucks Talk
I'm going to stick with this team no matter what. However, I have no interest in a rebuild. Look at our team on paper alone. We have the best scoring forward depth possibly ever, or at least since the 2011 team. We have a vezina-quality goalie - even if he hasn't been playing like it lately. Yes, the defense needs some retooling, but that's about it. On PAPER, this is a team worthy of the playoffs. But in practice, not so much so far. Yet, does that mean it is a good idea to blow it all up and start over? I don't think so. Whatever is ailing the team needs to be fixed. It was an issue during Green's tenure, and it is an issue so far this season as well. It isn't normal for a team with this much talent to lose 7 games in a row. Sure, we could blow it all up and start fresh, but who's to say that we will be any better off? However, if we stick with it, this team MAY turn the corner and start performing up to par. And if not, well, we can always do a fire sale midway through instead of now. It isn't like we are racking up the points, so if the idea is to tank, that's still entirely possible.... -
I think when things are going poorly, it isn't unusual to have fingers pointed. What better place to start than with the players who are supposed to lead your team. I bet you if they get on a 4 game winning streak, there will be little more mention of such issues.
-
I generally like the targets, but I think we end up losing that trade a bit. In my mind, The value of Garland and Rathbone together is slightly higher value than Roslovic alone - whereas you believe we are UNDERPAYING for Boqvist overall. Between Horvat and Boqvist, one is a proven performer, and the other hasn't really broken out yet but has a high ceiling in a position where we clearly need help. We'd be paying for potential and the position, and giving up a known commodity in Horvat. With this said, the trade becomes more appealing if we know there is no way we can re-sign Horvat and will have to move him anyway. Pearson Miller Boeser Kuzmenko Pettersson Mikheyev Podz Roslovic Hoglander Joshua Aman Lazar Hughes Boqvist OEL Myers Stillman Poolman Burroughs Yeah, I could get behind this. We aren't as strong on forward, but that D instantly looks a lot better....
-
True enough - he isn't any good. But that's *because* he hasn't done the things he needed to in order to be successful. Part of that is likely because he doesn't seem like the sharpest guy, but the other part is his lack of passion and commitment. We've all seen his speed and physicality when he wanted to display those elements. There is no doubt in my mind he had the tools that would have provided him a 3rd line career at minimum - if he only choose to grow up and give his all.
-
[Proposal] A Couple Bo Horvat Trade Ideas
kloubek replied to HKSR's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
As much as I think Severson would be a great addition to our team, he's almost UFA and I'd rather try to get him for free in the offseason. McLeod also seems to have some upside along with solid defensive acumen, so the value I think is reasonable but due to Severson's contract, I wouldn't do that trade. Honestly, I don't think it needs to be overcomplicated. If we did move Horvat, it seems to me the main piece (or only piece) needs to be a blueliner with similar star power. Until we lose at least one forward, we really don't need any more. Therefore, my opinion is we should trade him for someone like Pelech. I like his combination of defense and size. Or maybe Slavin - who also has good size. It would be a riot to get Pettersson from the Pens, who I think would also work out well with Hughes - although he's not a big guy. Conversely, with the suggestions of trading with Jersey, I'd almost sooner try to get Siegenthaler. No, he doesn't score a lot but he's a really good left-handed defensive player who should have enough speed to keep up with Hughes. -
We're talking Poolman here, right? So what if he gets waived? We win regardless of the outcome.
-
I've said it exhaustively, but Garland is NOT the guy we want to get rid of. Yes, he's small, but he plays much larger than he is. He's a steady 5 on 5 producer, is solid in both ends, and has the kind of passion we want our players to have. Additionally, we need a return for an NHL-ready top 4 defenseman now - not a prospect who may or may not become an NHL regular. The trade suggestion in the article is silly, as it basically says we would trade the productive Garland for a defensive prospect, plus another player we don't need to add to our forward group to even up the cap implications. No thanks. The other suggestion is acquiring Dumba, which I think is a far better proposition if there can be an extension negotiated beforehand. He's in his last contract year, so it makes sense the Wild would want to get something for him rather than let him walk. I would say in this scenario that HE should be our focus at, say, 5 years at 6m. However, I'd also say that they'd be getting the younger and better-valued contract in the trade. To make up the difference, maybe we ask for Addison and give them Poolman's contract and a 3rd? So, Garland+Poolman+3rd for Dumba, Addison Hughes Dumba OEL Myers Rathbone Schenn Addison, Dermott
-
We need to make a trade pretty soon to address our defense
kloubek replied to Odd.'s topic in Canucks Talk
I agree that we need to bring in a quality d-man, but most of us as well as the "experts" have been saying this for years. It's honestly nothing new. It's challenging though, as we are already over the cap and will have to massage the numbers via LTIR in order to be compliant. Essentially, this means if we were to bring in a D, we MUST ship out at least equal or higher salary. I'm actually quite disappointed that management didn't do anything for the D. It's clearly our weakest area, and this was known even before they were hired. I appreciate the Miller situation was looming, but I don't think it's a valid excuse that a team can be hamstrung from making moves because they are waiting for months on one player. It sure seems to me that with the abundance of forward depth that we're most likely to see a trade occur at some point which exchanges one of our forwards for a D. -
So according to Twitter, Mikheyev was thought to have possibly torn his ACL, but supposedly this is not the case. In fact, some are saying he should be back skating with the team in the next few days.
-
I'm most excited for our forward depth. I'm curious how playing what should be a game more in the offensive zone will offset our rather average defense. Seems like the boys are motivated. I expect a fun season, and a playoff appearance.
-
The days of a defenseman who can only shut down the opposition without keeping the play going is over. Just like the day is over where 4th liners no longer have to contribute on the scoresheet. But having a defensive defenseman doesn't negate our need for that same guy to be able to move the puck and read the play. This is why Tanev was so effective - he didn't score much and was great at limiting chances, but he wasn't a liability to our offense either. That's the kind of guy we need.
-
[Signing] Islanders re-sign Cory Schneider
kloubek replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Good on him. I thought his career was over, but he's still going for it. Unfortunately, he hasn't had a good season for like... 5 or 6 years so I'm not expecting much. -
They really do look alike. But only one performs in an actual sport.
-
[Signing] Avalanche re-sign Nathan MacKinnon
kloubek replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Wow. That's a LOT of cash. Not saying he isn't worth it as a top-5 NHL player, but this is the kind of contract that cripples a team. Just look at Edmonton or Toronto how they have difficulty finding cheap players for the rest of the team, so they become a one or two line team. I think Colorado is in a better position to do this, given their young talent, but it'll catch up with them soon enough. I don't know why anyone would complain about the contract though. He was criminally underpaid during his prior contract, so now he is reaping his just rewards. I don't think it was realistic to think he would be so giving the second time around. This is his last chance to make the big bucks, and this will take him to 35. If anything, THAT is the sticking point, since he will not likely be worth that figure by then. But this is what we are seeing all over the league: Pay now for your stars, worry about tomorrow tomorrow. -
I agree. I think Petey lost his confidence and perhaps wasn't 100%, and he got in a rut he found hard to get out of. I think this season we are going to see a Petey who is out to prove the world he IS one of the top 10-15 players in the game. He has always struck me as being very driven, and I don't think the start of his season last year is all an indicator of the player he is, or the player he will become. He was quite on fire for the second half of the season, and THAT is the Petey I think we will see more of. For Brock, he's clearly a sensitive guy, and I feel Duke's illness (RIP) was a huge factor in his focus. Hopefully he has now had time to grieve and can move on refreshed for this season. While Brock has some deficiencies to his game and may always, I still believe he has the capability of also being a ppg player. And let's also not just put it on these two guys. Yes, we rely on them to produce but let's face it - save for Hughes, Demko and Miller, most of our team didn't exactly excel in the first third of the season.
-
(Speculation) MTL potentially shopping Gallagher and Edmunson
kloubek replied to RWJC's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Absolutely not to Gallagher. He's already 30, signed for 5 more seasons, his last 2 have been his worst, and he's another small body, even if he plays bigger than he is. We already have that in Garland. No thanks. Edmundson, on the other hand, has been on my radar for a while. I like what he brings, and 3.5 isn't too bad. If we could move an extra forward in return, I'd like that very much. It's unfortunate he's LD, but there are options to shift things around a little. -
Honestly, I just haven't seen anything from Dermott that intrigues me. He seems to be an ok 2-way player, but hasn't shown anything (to me anyway) which positions him as a role player. His defense is generally ok, but he's not a stud shutdown guy. He's pretty mobile, but generally doesn't put up any significant points. He has some size, but doesn't really use it to his advantage. In my mind, he's a 3rd pairing guy or perhaps or even depth with a bit of upside at this point. I like the idea of OEL and Hughes together if Hughes moves to the right side. I think OEL has enough defensive smarts and 2-way acumen that he could be a good compliment. However, doing so means we blow our load on the 1st pairing, leaving Rathbone as the only remaining defenseman who may be capable of being an offensive threat. Like I said in my prior post, I think ideally we were to get a defensive RD with good mobility to compliment Hughes, which allows us to keep OEL in the 2nd pairing so it's still a threat. Then if Rathbone develops, we have all 3 pairings capable of scoring from the blueline. In any event, despite management's recent comments I don't think our blueline is good enough. No matter what the pairings are, we are clearly missing one key piece and everything as a result is really only a workaround until he arrives.