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. Been a (very) long time since we can say our 3rd line has realistic scoring potential. In fact, I feel if we really did put Horvat on that line, Kuz performed like we hope and Hoglander finally finds his game, that would likely be the best 3rd line we've ever had. Yes, those are two big question marks but I think there is a reasonable chance the Canucks will come out on the positive side of that possibility.
  2. They aren't dead in the water. They took a big hit in the offseason, and that happens. They got a truly amazing return under the circumstances. Now they just need to shake the negativity off, regroup, and start with a fresh attitude. We're still gonna kick their butts.
  3. I guess this is where there is the debate, and hence opinions on course of action. And if I'm being honest, there are way more fans and "experts" that agree with you than I. If one believes we don't have the components to be a contender, then waiting and building is the only logical answer. But I see what we accomplished once Bruce came in, plus the additions management have made, and hopefully will still make on our D. And I believe we may already be good enough. I believe we have the best forward group since 2011 as it sits, and possibly the best group ever if our players play to their full ability. Add in luck and momentum, and I think many are underestimating what this team will be capable of come puck drop. Mind you, I said the same things this time last year and we sputtered mightily out of the gate, so.....
  4. It's a process. Benning was left with a team that required a full rebuild and nothing in the cupboards. Current management is left with the same depleted cupboards, but a team that is up and coming and "almost there". It isn't the same situation. We CAN continue Bennings philosophy. Because as many mistakes as he made, he ultimately built the team to what it has become - current offseason moves aside. And love him or hate him, we have a decent team. At this point, we don't need more forward depth. We need replacements for when we can no longer afford our youngest guys as they mature to their prime. And for that, we have time.
  5. If we do move Miller, it would have to be part or all of the return. If we don't, then maybe we give up picks and one or two of what few prospects we have. It will certainly hurt the future, but we should have most if not all key players locked up for years. By all rights, besides what we may give up to acquire today, we should have a few straight years of drafted players available to the team when most key contracts end. I just don't see the point of waiting because we want to focus on our depleted pipeline. We have players who are entering their prime now. The Canucks were already a solid team after the coaching change, and I truly believe with the solid offseason additions and IF we at least get a proper partner for Hughes, we could well be a contender already. If Podz, Kuz and Hogs all flourish, I really think we would be. Alas, my understanding is that management believes the window is in 2-3 years. And sure enough, from a development perspective, I imagine that would be when this team is strongest.
  6. This. If we lost a winger, our forward lines still look pretty good. But if we go into the season with the same D, we can expect the same results.
  7. He hasn't been that great of late, but Butcher has some real promise when he entered the league. This seems like a no-brainer depth move for a team that wants an offensive defenseman waiting in the wings. In one thread I had actually suggested him as a target - though with Rathbone expected to play in the bigs, we really don't have the need.
  8. I kinda thought the same thing. But at the end of the day, the onus is on prosecution to come up with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and in a case like this I imagine doing so is extremely challenging. She voluntarily went to his hotel room, and as mentioned, then it becomes a he said she said.
  9. Wouldn't be my main target, for certain. We really need to be looking for another Tanev-like player more than anything, but adding a player like PK on the cheap doesn't seem like a horrible idea as he still brings some of everything despite his dramatic decline. I'd far sooner have PK at 1m than I would have been to see Stecher back at 1m. As Canuckster86 said, if we moved Myers that would open up a spot while saving us a ton of cap. Then we could use that cap, and get Hughes his stay at home defenseman. This, of course, assumes we manage to figure something out with Poolman. If we had the cap, I'd love to see if we could swing something for: Adam Larsson K'Andre Miller Brandon Carlo Hughes Larsson/Miller/Carlo OEL Subban Rathbone Schenn Dermott However, if we were to re-sign Miller, we wouldn't be able to afford this level of defenseman. In that case, I would suggest we trade with Jersey for Jonas Siegenthaler. He's a low-cost, a highly smart defensive player who I think would pair well with Hughes. He's also RFA at the end of next season, so there might be an opportunity to get him signed longer term. Hughes Sieganthaler OEL Subban Rathbone Schenn Dermott
  10. I agree with everything you said, but this in particular seems to get overlooked by most. The Canucks, as they were made up last year, showed what they were capable of. However, the slow start killed us. There is no doubt we had some issues last year, once again. But that's bound to happen when you have your stars underperforming. Once we righted the ship with Bruce, we had one of the best teams in the league. Now, that isn't to say the team didn't still have major deficiencies - like still relying on Demko way too much (due to a poor team defensive structure and the lack of a true shutdown defender), and maybe not having quite the scoring depth of other teams. IF we move forward with Miller, this will be one of the most offensively deep teams we've ever had. And if not, the additions should keep our scoring at least a wash from last season. I also think we have improved the forward lineups defensively at the same time. Management will need to work on the D still, but they've made clear they are aware of that. I truly feel we have the potential for a very good team this coming season - only likely to derail if we fall apart like we've done two years running now.
  11. I beg to differ about him not being a difference maker. He just isn't... fancy, and doesn't light the lamp every game. But he takes abuse in front of the net, plays physical, has solid hockey IQ, legit size, good speed, and is far above average defensively. He may not drive play much, but lack of top-end offensive ability aside, I'd say he has a collection of attributes that a GM would wish upon all his players. I will say, however, that I'd be more excited for us getting Mikheyev. His unsurpassed speed will be a hoot to watch every night. Similar, in some ways, to how I'm sometimes in awe of the lateral mobility of Hughes. Elite skill like that is so fun to bear witness to.
  12. The value in this contract isn't actually the scoring. Yes, he's a 30-40 point player but 4m aav seems pretty average for that level of production. What makes this a good deal for the Preds is Nino's size, playing style, and 200ft game.
  13. I know the cupboards are pretty bare by this point, but the way I see it this way. Management has 2 roads they can go down right now. Road 1 dictates we do what we can to win now. This means dipping into those bare cupboards even more, and giving up some futures in order to open our window starting with the 22-23 season. Road 2 says that we don't actually go all-in yet. Instead, we allow draft the younger guys to finish developing, and collect picks and prospects for a couple of years and THEN make the necessary changes after we have more chips to play with. Here, we vie for the cup in 2-3 years. Personally, I prefer road 1. I think once we fix up the D a bit this team is as good as most others, and save for Colorado, and *perhaps* the Blues, I believe we could be the best team in the West. I feel the progression of our younger players DURING the next two seasons is what will push us over the edge to be a true contender. But I don't think we have to wait to do this. Yes, prospects are important for replenishment purposes, but we don't NEED to add any prospects to this team right now. We're already set. And it's for THIS reason that I want to see us contend now sooner than later. Then by the time we actually do need the replenishment in 2-4 years time, hopefully we will have drafted well enough to make that possible. I think more than anything I'm just sick of the rebuild. It's been going on a long time, and I just want to see us win. And I believe we can do that now instead of waiting.
  14. That seems pretty high for a guy who regressed to half his production from the prior year.
  15. I wouldn't do that either. We finally have the kind of forward depth we haven't had since 2011. Garland is not really that expensive, and has elements to his game we would miss. I would sooner spend the outrageous cost it takes to move out players that haven't worked out for us, or are not playing to their contract. Poolman for certain, Dickinson if management doesn't believe he can have a bounceback year. Move Myers and his overpaid contract for a player that's defensively super solid and hopefully more physical. Perhaps Pearson if management doesn't believe he's good enough to play top 6 minutes. Save 2-4m somewhere along these lines, and we no longer have a cap crunch.
  16. I too am pretty stoked about the signings - even if they aren't star players. I think we needed the influx of defensive responsibility to our team overall, and this helps provide it. What I like is that management seems to be (re)building the team the "right way". They aren't overpaying for UFAs, they are trying to make sure the bottom forward and defensive lines are manned by guys making low salaries, and aren't making knee-jerk decisions. I believe it seems pretty clear that Rathbone-Schenn is the expected 3rd pairing, and is perfect. Limited time to keep Schenn fresher and sheltered minutes for Rathbone as he learns his NHL game, while paying both at salaries which aren't going to make much of a dent in our cap situation. Similarly, the 4th line is shaping up to be a crash and bang kind of line that also doesn't hurt our cap situation much. Certainly a much better position to be in than paying someone like LE 6m to do nothing out there. I'm pretty happy with our forward lines in particular. We have more depth now, and I'm excited to see what Mikhayev can do with his speed on maybe a 2nd line role. Even if Miller leaves, we are maybe just barely worse in scoring ability, and if he stays we are clearly a better team than last year. D still needs work - but this management group is giving me confidence they will find a way....
  17. The return seems just slightly underwhelming compared to the names and packages that have been speculated. Don't get me wrong - Pulock is *precisely* the kind of guy we need for a top pairing with Hughes so I love the target. I also like that we cap dump Poolman, which I suppose is where the lack of value appears because it's costly to move (somewhat) dead cap space - especially with term. This trade also loses one of our best prospects in McDonough (which isn't saying much as he is far from an NHL lock) and Wahlstrom took a big step back last season and we don't really need yet another forward, even if Miller exits the lineup. But overall, it does help us on a couple of fronts. Solid proposal. But perhaps we drop Wahlstrom from the deal? Miller, Poolman, 2nd for Pulock, 1st
  18. I didn't find it particularly odd. In any given season and especially in the playoffs, it's common to have a blueliner out with injury. So having NHL-quality depth available is a good thing. There seems also to be perceived upside to Dermott. I personally don't see it, but if his worth lessens we waive, and if it increases it gives us options OR trade deadline fodder.
  19. Price, Bob, and Vasi say "Hi". If one were to look at the number of goalies compared to the number of skaters, I think the percentage of those in the upper echelon of salary compared to skaters would be fairly similar. So, what... because no goalie makes McJesus's 12.5m that this proves there is a disproportionate ratio? I don't buy it. I'd say most goalies aren't cap savers because there's only 1 starting goalie, whereas you need a team full of skaters so that's where the potential for cap savings is greatest. I have always felt that if a team was to pay dearly for top talent that the goalie is the very first place to invest. A mediocre team with a stellar goalie can still win. (Heck, just look at our own team and how Marky and Demko have at least kept us in playoff discussions). We are very lucky to have a goalie of Demko's calibre locked in for his term and cap hit. People sh*t on Benning and Co. constantly and yes, we had to deal with some mistakes that were costly, but the team did a solid job assessing Demko's talent, and negotiating his contract.
  20. As much as I'm not *whatsoever* on the "Trade Garland" train, I like your target. If that's what it takes to improve our D, then sacrificing some of our forward depth is the likely place to do it. I'm telling you all though, we are a better team Garland on it than not. Don't be blinded by his small size - he mitigates it well, and is one of the reasons our 5 on 5 play went from one of the worst in the league a couple of years ago to acceptable levels this past season. And if one looks at his salary, it's reasonable for what he brings. But in your proposal, we move out some dead cap at the same time, which is the other objective for this team besides improving the D. It's probably the kind of move that the Hawks would go for, although I wonder if it was adjusted to be purely a cap dump if it would suit both teams even better: Dickinson, Poolman, Zlodeyev, Woo, 2023 2nd, 2024 2nd. Is this realistic?
  21. We don't know what is going on with Miller yet, let alone management's ability/desire to move other top 6 wingers. We don't know how Kuzmenko will adapt to the NHL. We don't know how Hogz is going to play next season. There are so many questions for which the answers will dictate if Hogs gets stuck on a 4th line or not. In any event, it's completely a waste to use him as a sweetener as his stock ought to be pretty low right now. I expect to see him stick around and hope he will show everyone what he is capable of.
  22. He did. Which is why I only wanted to re-sign him for depth but not to be permanently on the big club. He did bring some points, but was meh in virtually every other way on the ice.
  23. Yeah, I agree, Boeser has been pretty one-dimensional. I would argue, however, that his game is a bit more rounded than it once was - at least defensively. Even with that said though, I agree with you on most of your points - you'd expect more physicality from a relatively big guy, and he doesn't excel in many areas outside simply scoring. I still feel he is young enough to continue to improve his game though. I think we're going to see a better Boeser than last season.
  24. .34ppg with limited ice time, all at a low salary. I actually would have liked to keep him around for injury depth if nothing else. No big loss though...
  25. I'm not against trading Myers for something like a 2nd, but it would be essential to replace him with an equally or more competent defenseman, and one who is equally capable at blocking shots. (Which is the one thing Myers is really good at).
×
×
  • Create New...