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. I'm pretty sure that was not the consensus. I haven't looked back, but recall it being largely negative. Tanev is an elite shutdown guy, and at least he had a tiny bit of offensive acumen. Poolman has shown to be very mediocre in all respects. But if he was being affected by his condition, that certainly couldn't have helped.
  2. I have no ill will to Zack. He plays hard and tries to make a difference. And in a limited respect, he does. When he was claimed, I believe he took it like a classy guy and immediately filled the same role in Philly. For as long as a goon is required on a team, I'm glad to see his career continue in this league.
  3. He did? 9 points in almost an entire season? You might say: Well, sure. He isn't on a team as a scorer... he's a checking and fighting type player. And this would be true. However, while a player who can do little else other than hit and be intimidating was the kind of guy almost every team had one or two of 20 years ago, the NHL has changed. When teams like Florida score 340 goals in a single season, teams cannot afford to use up roster spots for guys who can't chip in with points. So, sure he is successful in a goon role. But personally, I'd rather us have a guy who goons it up less but scores double the points. At the end of the day, you can win every single fight but that isn't the stat that pushes a team into the playoffs.
  4. This is my guess. In a cap-strapped league, making the wrong decision here can be costly. Bratt is onboard because if he can provide himself as a consistent force then I expect his next contract to be a noticeably higher, multi-year deal.
  5. Sorry - I missed the "forwards" part. That makes sense, as defensemen usually have more blocked shots for obvious reasons.
  6. I was going to point out these two things as being quite impressive, given what I had assumed was low ice time. Then I went to see the stats for myself. Sure enough, his ice time was at the bottom. And 186 hits. That's noticeably more than the 2nd place Foligno at 164. Extremely impressive. But according to my data source, he was 7th in blocking shots. Looking forward to his contributions.
  7. I think he's probably holding out for more money. Motte isn't the most talented player, but he's reasonably effective because he plays all-out hockey. Unfortunately, this is also difficult to sustain without injury - as proven by his absences each season. At this point in his career, he may just be going for the paycheque before his body breaks down permanently. Problem for Motte is that in New York he played more like Lockwood did for us last season - lots of energy and grit, but at the end of the day, no points to show for it. Looking for 2m(ish) is a big ask, all things considered, and it's understandable why we moved on. It also makes sense why he isn't signed yet - as my guess is he's following the paycheque.
  8. I was nervous about them taking Pettersson in 5th. I wanted Glass or Vilardi - both of which haven't exactly turned out. That was actually the draft that convinced me Benning and company were world-class talent assessors. In the end, he was decent, but some misses too. I also felt that signing LE and Ferland were both great things for our team.
  9. It's all about the role. No, he's not a high paid, fancy player that is going to get you lots of points. But for a 4th line player, he plays the role well. If we didn't already have our 4th line basically set, I'd be interested. But as it stands we already have too many forwards.
  10. I was personally not super keen on the signing, but trusted the drafting of Benning & co. (I wanted either Tkachuk or Nylander) Sure enough, we needed a good defenseman at the time and, guess what? We still do. It didn't take long for my reluctance to like the trade became just pure disappointment. Right from the start I couldn't see what others saw in him and the only thing he did on the ice that I felt was NHL-level was his passing vision. Along with the injuries and lack of conditioning, it was such a disaster of a high pick. I don't even want to think about it. I'm getting verklempt.
  11. I'm actually glad he's off the table. I feel he would have been an expensive and incorrect fit here.
  12. Yeah, although Miyechev doesn't replace Pearson's heavy board play. In any event, there are only so many spots to go around and only so much cap to spend. We need to clear out cap if we want to help the D, and with our newfound depth on forward it only makes sense to me that SOMEONE has to go. Pearson at least should have some value, whereas I think we'd get very little for Hogs at this point. I would rather keep Garland since I think there is still even more upside there and don't believe his size is a major detriment, and hte remaining players are likely negative value which are hard to move.
  13. It was clear the Canucks needed a change. We were not progressing as we should have, considering that Benning did collect a solid core. He made some mistakes during his tenure for certain, but every GM does. At the end of the day, I agree that the team is largely what it was before and that Benning did ultimately do a reasonable job building it. The main thing I would say against Benning is that he overpaid for contracts which limited our future ability to navigate the cap. But in my opinion, our biggest issue was Green. I didn't mind him as a person, but I didn't like how he and his group couldn't find a way to maintain a reasonable defensive structure. It also seemed like players were not super excited to play, and we saw slumps from players we really couldn't see slumps from. I believe this is a good team, and better than many give it credit for. If Miller stays to start the season, I think we will see noticeably more scoring from last year, though I don't agree with Rutherford that our D is good enough. It couldn't possibly be considered good enough until such time as we at LEAST get Hughes his permanent partner.
  14. Moving Hoglander right now will almost certainly not get us the value we deserve for a player with his skills. I have a feeling he will play well enough during training camp that we will have no choice but to put him in the lineup, and after that point perhaps he will have increased his value that it becomes worth the risk to move him. I'm still of the camp that says he has a 2nd line floor and a 1st line ceiling. Of course, trading Dickinson is a useful move from a cap perspective, and he almost certainly holds negative value, so we gotta sweeten it for them if such a move was made. I'd sooner move a player who has established himself so we get full value out of it. As others have said, I am also squeamish about his injuries over the last several seasons - although when healthy I do think he would be a good fit with Hughes.
  15. Wow - that's really cheap. If you look at this guy's career ppg, he's almost a point-every-other-game player. That's elite 3rd line production, but really closer to 2nd line production. For 1 million? Great signing by the Pens.
  16. Yeah, I get the concept of defense through superior offense. And it's entirely a thing. If your team is in transition or the o-zone the whole time, you don't have to worry about how good your D is. However, that isn't reality. Though a team can tip the scales in their favour depending on their offensive skill/depth (and we have more of it than last year) the other team will *always* get quality entry and scoring chances. I don't think I've ever seen a team so overwhelming on offense that they don't allow any chances at all. And if you have not one defenseman who can successfully defend an opposing rush, then you're going to get scored on a lot more than you'd like. Schenn would become our best defensive defenseman, I suppose, and that's just a scary thought given his lack of foot speed. But again, it isn't really ONLY the fact we would be getting rid of our best defensive defenseman, but also all the other elements I mentioned of length of contract, age, etc. I just don't personally see it as a good fit. If we had a defensive defenseman already in place then I probably wouldn't be scrutinizing this quite as much.
  17. I'm not. Although he would certainly bring more scoring from our backend, he gives up a lot of chances against, which imo greatly reduces his overall effectiveness. Myers seems to be well liked in the room, is more physical (though not as physical as he could be), has only has a couple of years left on his contract, and is young enough that we can expect a similar season from his next year. No, Myers isn't ideal for what we need, but he's a lot closer to the mould of the kind of defenseman we require to shut down the other lines than Klingberg. Additionally, Klingberg has seen his performance drop off over the last 2-3 years, so the trend is already set for that to possibly continue. In addition to having to sign him for multiple years (I think we'd be lucky if he accepted only 5), it just doesn't seem like a smart move for us - even IF we got a mid to low pick for Myers. The contract may well be a bad one from the beginning, and will only age poorly as Klingberg works through his 30's. Thanks but no thanks. In fact, I'm really surprised such an experienced management team would even THINK this was a good idea. Now we'd have TWO Larsson-type contracts to hinder us.
  18. This. Unless there are cameras, an eye witness or a confession, these kinds of charges are always a huge challenge to prove. Even if one manages to show ill character of the accused, or can show physical damage, it's still up to that reasonable doubt. In this particular case, supposedly she claimed a couple of things which were not possible, which then obviously added question to her own story. It was a loss waiting to happen.
  19. Ok, maybe not. Once I broke it down, I realized it might be underpayment - but perhaps not as much as you believe. Miller in my opinion COULD be considered more valuable than Barzal. He's bigger, has more proven leadership, and as of last season, was the better scorer. Then there's the much (much) lower retained salary. Yes of course he is older and yes an extension would need to be in place, but I think they are close to a wash. Or, at least could potentially be viewed as such. Especially if they really wish to move on from Barzal. I wonder how much negative value Poolman has. The idea in my proposal was to throw in maybe a low-end prospect (Woo) and the 3rd round pick. Perhaps that isn't enough. That left Garland, Forsell, Zlodeyev, and the 2nd for Dobson. I know Dobson had a great year and all, but his sample size is still relatively small. Perhaps this still isn't enough for a promising young player like Dobson?
  20. We have to trust the justice system was correct in this case. They had a lot more detail that we ever did, and there was clearly a reasonable doubt. Good for him. Now he can continue his lackluster career. I'm still glad he's off the team.
  21. We are talking 2 different things. More discretion as it pertains to offsides and details that don't affect the play, but more consistency into what constitutes a penalty, the length of it, and and supplemental discipline.
  22. What's the point in moving Ferland? He's going straight to LTIR anyway.
  23. These thoughts are probably NOT unpopular, but.... I really think the league ought to put more control with the refs than rules that are invoked for plays that are inconsequential TO the play. For example: If a player is 1" offside, did it REALLY make a difference to the outcome of the play? Probably not. As mentioned, stop the coaches challenge for that kind of event, and rely on the refs. Yes, mistakes will be made - but it would speed up the game and not make goals get called back because of a technicality. Get rid of Bettman. I know he's done well, but it isn't just about your ability but also how you are perceived as the head of the league. Besides the fact I think he needs to move on, it really looks like he has Parkinson's anyway. Consistency. It's hard enough to get every call right, but they should at least be consistent from game to game so players know how far they can push the limits. Abolish the kicking rule. Allow goals to occur no matter HOW they get into the net - save for being literally thrown in. Redirect off arms, legs, skates, whatever. If the idea is to increase scoring (which is has been for years), then this would help. Readjust the scoring. Regulation win = 3 points, OT Win = 2 points, OT loss = 1 point.
  24. So, sign and trade? That's a bad look for us - particularly considering what Boeser has gone through lately with his father. It's a no from me, based on the optics alone. I'd far sooner send them Miller if we could get Dobson coming back. I've actually heard Barzal wants out. So how's this for a blockbuster? Miller, 25% retained Garland Poolman Woo Forsell Zlodeyev 2023 2nd rd. 2024 3rd rd. for Dobson Barzal Why does this work? Barzal had a down year and like I said, I believe he wants out. Next year, they will have to re-sign him as well as Whalstrom, Currently, they already need to re-sign Dobson. They simply won't have enough cap space next year so they need to unload someone, somehow. And as fast as Barzal is, Miller appears to be the more complete player and at least of last year, the bigger point-getter. The way I figure it, Garland and Miller improve their offense slightly over the two players they lose, and in addition they gain a couple decent prospects and a couple of higher picks. I really like Garland and his contract is good, but you gotta give to get. This obviously also helps us by moving Poolman (A poor fill-in for Dobson, but it is what it is) And yes, I realize we draw from our futures a bit with this, but on the flip side, I would see Dobson BEING our future. Our new lineup: Podz Pettersson Boeser - Open for negotiation, but of course this assumes that Podz comes ouf of the gate on fire Kuzmenko Barzal Mikeyev - This becomes the fastest line in the NHL Hoglander Horvat Pearson - Despite Hoglander's poor year, he is known for having a top-notch corsi. Combine with these teammates, it allows for a line that would spend about half their time on offense, half their time on defense when the 4th line is not available. Joshua Lazar Lockwood - Our dedicated checking line. Hughes Dobson - That looks a lot better, doesn't it? OEL Myers - They combined well last season and would be expected to be our shutdown pairing. Still not ideal, but if we don't move Myers this is probably the best we can expect. Rathbone Schenn - Schenn supports Rathbone's development. Hughes/Dobson will clearly be relied on to get the points, but Rathbone gives us a secondary option.
  25. I hope you're right. I've been supporting Hogs since he arrived, and I've always put his floor at a 2nd liner. I thought last season would be his year to shine, but I'll give him a sophomore mulligan, and hope to see him show what he is capable of this season. As for Kuz, this wouldn't be the first time a touted KHL player came over but didn't work out, like Shipachyov, Gusev (who started with a bang, but left soon after), Plotnikov, and Grigorenko as examples. Of course, there are a list of players who did the same and worked out - like Panarin, Bobrovsky, Dadonov, and now our very own Mikheyev. I do think there are elements in our favour. Kuz already has great skating which is the first hurdle overcome. Between him and Mikheyev, we should be a far quicker team which will be exciting to watch. He also has some solid skill. Really, there is no reason to believe he will fail - although I should point out that in his past KHL season, he got a lot more ppg than he had any other prior season so hopefully that's his true, current level of ability rather than a one-off.
×
×
  • Create New...