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

kloubek

Members
  • Posts

    5,665
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kloubek

  1. What a steal for the Knights. We can all joke about Phil as an anomaly in the NHL, but at the end of the day he is still a solid contributor.- even this late in his career.
  2. He wouldn't be the first player in the NHL to have strong offensive skills, but questionable defense. I'm quite confident that despite a lack of points in the NHL games that he's played that he will be capable of being a reasonable offensive performer. But yes, it's that defense which has caused questions for him and will ultimately be what sets his ceiling.
  3. I believe, based on his 1-way contract, that management believes he will likely be capable of the 3LD role out of the gate. Training camp will play the biggest part in the decision, but I expect to see him in our opening lineup unless Dermott progressed himself well in the offseason.
  4. That'd be nice. The upside would depend on what kind of game Sandin comes with next season. I truly believe he is blossoming, but have been wrong before. I think management believes in Rathbone, and I agree with you that he may have the higher ceiling... as well as your comment about Schenn, who I love for everything he brings at his paycheque. We'd be even smaller without him, and I think he had a very solid season for us. In the end, I wouldn't do this trade either.
  5. I'm not saying I would be for or against this trade, but my belief is two-fold: 1) We really don't know what we have with Rathbone yet. Plus Sandin showed better offensive ability last season and may be due for a breakout season. 2) Sandin has proven himself one of Toronto's best defensive defensemen. He faltered a little last season in an effort to get more points, but generally he's very solid defensively - at least against lesser competition. I think he would currently fit in a #3 or #4 role on our team, with a possible potential of being the #2 complementary player for Hughes that we've been lacking since Tanev left.
  6. Am I the only one who thinks this looks quite inadequate? Solid top pairing. But Myers is just passable as a 2nd pairing guy and Dermott has shown little to warrant the spot. That's a weak 2nd. Rathbone and Schenn I'm actually ok with for the bottom pairing. I'd sooner see us lose a little forward depth to get a true top pairing guy for Hughes. Keep OEL in the 2nd pairing where he probably belongs best, and the rest plays out to the bottom, with Rathbone and Dermott left to fight out 3LD. Management really only needs that one Tanev-like guy to make it all work. Brodin, Carlo, Siegenthaler, K'Andre Miller, Mikey Anderson, Grzelyk (?) kind of guy. Myers is the closest thing we have to a guy like that, but he isn't at all to the level we need for Hughes.
  7. I don't know if I'd call OEL's contract a "bargain". 7-1/4m is a lot of money, and honestly, I would generally expect more from a player making that kind of salary. However, he's a solid player (certainly top 4 material still) and let's not forget that Benning did gain some benefit from acquiring him - that's how we shed some salary for last season and acquired Garland. I'm not as concerned about his salary right now, but come 2026 or 2027, I imagine decisions may have to be made to shed that pricetag.
  8. No surprise there about Myers. He just doesn't really pass the eye test many games. Dickinson never really did pass the same test since he arrived, but I'm hopeful if we keep him that we'll see an improvement. I think Schenn gets a pass, considering the competition he was put up against and what he otherwise brings to the lineup. Lammiko is gone, and Burroughs isn't likely going to be with the big club to start and will be used more for injury fill-ins. So really, the only one that concerns me is Myers. But without a suitable replacement, I just don't see us moving on from him in any way.
  9. I thought about this. I feel Lazar is being brought in as the full-time 4th given his one-way contract, but if he had to be demoted I guess it's possible. Wouldn't he be waiver eligible then? If so, I would imagine unless he falls flat on his face, he'll be in the lineup. Yes, Dickinson was bad. But it was also his first year with a new team and he also battled injuries. Given that by all accounts he is a great guy (and I saw spurts of actual skill out there over the season), I wouldn't be surprised to see them give him a 2nd chance. He can go on waivers all we want, but I can't imagine he would be claimed at his salary and recent play.
  10. I can't help but think if management wants to bring in a center when we already have enough centers AND forwards, they already have a plan worked out for who will be exiting. And although Rodrigues can play all positions, my guess is the plan is to move out a center. We know Horvat isn't likely going anywhere and Lazar certainly isn't, which leaves Miller or Dickinson to be on the move.
  11. Me too. I'd rank it like this: Edmonton Oilers Calgary Flames (I could see a case to swap the 1st and 2nd spots) Vancouver Canucks Vegas Golden Knights LA Kings Anaheim Ducks Seattle Kraken San Jose Sharks
  12. Well, Pettersson is absolutely one of the two for me. I maintain he's going to be considered in the top 10 and possibly as much as top 5 or 6 in a year or two. The decision between Horvat and Miller is a difficult one. Obviously, you have the age and the fact that Horvat is well liked and is the captain of the team. He also tends to be the stronger 200-ft player, and seems to be better in control of his emotions. He'd be cheaper, and has a far longer history with Vancouver. There's also the optics of moving your captain. On the other hand, Miller has been the bigger play driver between the two and produces more. I think he makes players around him better, whereas with Horvat we look for the *right* players to put with him. His contract also has a higher chance of looking questionable as the years mount. So, in the end I'm going to pick Pettersson and Horvat. Not because I think Horvat is a better player than Miller, but the contract itself should look far more palatable with Horvat.
  13. I agree. I never saw a lot in Woo, even when CDC was all excited for him early on. I didn't expect him to succeed, and now I REALLY don't expect him to. Klimovich is a toss-up, as you state. He needs to work on his 2-way game, though his base offensive ability is undeniable. There are other prospects we have which I think would carve out an NHL career: I do think Lekkerimaki will make it to the NHL - though his ceiling is yet undetermined because the kid is only... what.. 17? I think this is the only prospect we have with top 6 potential. I've watched a lot of tape on him, and he is quite skilled. I also feel that McDonough may be able to produce in a bottom 6 role. I like the way he plays, though I just don't feel he has top-level talent that would allow him to get into the top 6. Although I didn't expect much initially, all reports are that EP2.0 is looking strong. Could be good for a bottom pairing or more eventually. Even though most experts are not, I'm also hopeful for Karlsson. I think he has a lot of skill, but needs to get faster and put it all together at a higher level.
  14. This I can buy into. If moving Hogs is what we require to get that top 4 D we so badly need, then I could buy in. But ONLY for that, since I too feel it is our only real area of weakness. But this 1 for 1 thing for players who I believe will likely be lesser players through this career just doesn't work for me.
  15. Enough with the Hoglander proposals, people. Give the kid another chance to prove himself before we move him for pennies on the dollar.
  16. I personally believe PK can still play in this league. No, he's absolutely not the player he used to be nor worth the salary, but he still has skills which could be useful on a team. I'm just not sure that's our team. If we bring in another RD, I would expect it is a guy who we feel can play with Hughes. PK doesn't have the elite defensive instincts that I feel we need for that partner. In a pinch, we can play Hughes with Schenn which wasn't really that bad of a pairing. No it isn't ideal, but then, I don't think PK would be either, so....
  17. I agree with BlastPast. Moving him right now and adding one of our extra NHL-quality forwards in return for a center that could really perform would probably help the team, but if he can return to form after a poor year, he's not a significant overpayment, really. It seems everyone has written him off, which I understand because he really had very little to be proud of, but it's ONE season with a new team. By all accounts he's a quality, good guy and I think he deserves another shot. Otherwise, not only do we potentially see him thrive elsewhere, but we also overpaid to make it happen. It isn't like if he continues his play his value is going to go much lower than it is now...
  18. When we first drafted him, I was actually concerned he would get injured with his very slight build. He came through fine. But to those who don't think he has the capability of being a true star in this league, I would say gaining strength to really power through traffic is the one thing he still needs to reach his potential. He already has elite... well.. pretty much everything else.
  19. I say no because it's Hoglander. If he is given a chance, I still feel he will succeed. And because I don't feel a flyer on an offensive but undersized player is going to get any better than Rathbone. If we add to the defensive group, it's gotta be with the mind of finding Hughes his partner.
  20. Well, let's not forget that last year after the coaching change, we were one of the better teams in the league. Now, any time one is working with a truncated sample size it doesn't necessarily mean much, and it isn't uncommon for a team to temporarily respond to a new coach, but it WAS an impressive improvement. I guess my viewpoint takes that level of team and expands upon it based on the new acquisitions. We're faster and more gritty now. We have an extra year of experience under our belts for many of our players, and almost all our players are poised to improve slightly with only a couple who are likely to regress a bit. You say we might "squeak" in, whereby my perspective is that we WILL get into the playoffs, and in fact think this team may well vie for tops in the Pacific. Now, considering the strength of the Pacific that doesn't necessarily say I am confident we will actually contend for the cup next year, but it wouldn't absolutely floor me if the Canucks went on a run either. I believe we have so much depth of forward talent now across all 4 lines that if this team isn't successful next season, I'm looking straight at the D.
  21. You make lots of great points. Not going to quote the whole block. The difference is where you see the team as opposed to myself. I personally feel that our forward group is actually just fine as it sits, and that we are one or two tweaks on our D away from contention overall. I realize this is not a popular opinion. The issue with our lineup is not knowing what we are going to have to work with. Hoglander regressed and was injured. Will he be a force this season? Podz showed well, though he didn't exactly blow the doors off the stat sheet. Yet, we can see the potential. We have brought in Kuzmenko, who may be a legit 1st line player, or may fall flat on his face in a different country and market. Will Joshua and Lazar provide us with more speed and grit on our 4th? And, presumably combined with Lockwood, are they able to put up some points while they are at it? Does Petey start the season off running? Will Boeser return to form? Will Mikheyev thrive here and continue to build on his last season? Then on the back end, a big question is how much Rathbone will contribute. We still clearly need a proper partner for Hughes. There is certainly work to be done here, which is where I feel our ability to contend will depend. I believe the chances of everything above going our way is unlikely. However, I feel the chances of MOST going our way probably IS likely. And, if so, then I believe we have a forward group that can rival any other. Do we have legendary players in that group? Not really. But to say we don't have "stars" I believe is erroneous. I still feel Petey is destined to give more. And on the backend, I believe Hughes is already a star. Next to those two, I feel while we may not exactly have legit star power, we have a combination of players with a significant amount of ability. Boeser should have a more consistent season now that he can focus back on hockey. Horvat is a beast of a player most games. We have one of the fastest players in the NHL in Mikheyev. Garland can still improve and is a little firecracker. Kuzmenko may prove to be a star in his own right. Podz may be at some point soon, and be damned if I don't believe Hoglander will still achieve top 6 placement. Then if we keep Miller, we all know what he can do - even if he will almost inevitably be leaving us. I dunno. That's a LOT of quality players there.
  22. If we were to consider our center depth as being: Miller Pettersson Horvat Lazar ... I would say that challenges for best center depth in the league. But as mentioned, they had pegged Pettersson as a LW. For what it's worth, that boosted our LW "ranking" to "Outperform", or the 2nd highest tier. Without him there, we would be stuck with Pearson, Mikheyev, Kuzmenko and Joshua, which would have dropped us to average (at best) in his left wing rankings.
  23. I wouldn't say he's average, or even slightly above average. What he brings isn't just in points, but many intangibles. I would argue he's borderline elite as a 4th. His biggest issues right now are his durability, and the fact he's holding out for as much money as possible.
  24. Gretzky. I wonder if the "great one"; would be nearly as effective in today's NHL.
  25. It's not necessarily too much for a 3rd pairing guy. Its too much for a mediocre 3rd pairing guy. But really man, we've been here a long time and have seen many of our members think they can predict the future. I remember the excitement around Shinkaruk (sp) especially, but Juolevi, Woo, Gaudette, Virtanen and a host of others were all deemed future star NHL players by certain groups. I personally tend to be hopeful, but maybe more aware of how few young players actually succeed in this league - so if I'm wrong, it's usually by a player exceeding my expectations. That's why I'll be super disappointed if Hoglander doesn't succeed, because I picked him as a winner long ago. Poolman does not have a high ceiling. It was a bad signing from the beginning. Maybe it won't be so bad if he's on LTIR.
×
×
  • Create New...