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

Ray_Cathode

Members
  • Posts

    4,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ray_Cathode

  1. As long as he’s not singin’ Rock and Roll Music, while Rollin Over Beethoven with Maybeline in Kansas City. Good Night Sweetheart, it’s time for me to go...
  2. Oops. Senile dementia strikes again!
  3. Well, after all my bleating on about Jasek being a viable option for the black aces, apparently he is not. From Canucks Army: https://canucksarmy.com/2020/06/08/vancouver-canucks-submit-list-of-black-aces-that-includes-sven-baertschi/
  4. I’ve been dying from lack of hockey, and there you go, just dial in another Utica game from last year. Duh, I never even thought of it. Totally agree on Jasek, but I do have to say that Gaudette impressed at a more audacious level when he was down there - he did earn his promotion. But then so did MacEwen. MacEwen was not the best forward in Utica, but of our young forward crop, he was the one furthest along in development with the possible exception of Jasek. But MacEwen also brought some grit and sandpaper which we sorely needed. Anyway, he got a chance and surprise surprise, he could play - especially in the attacking zone with players who knew where to find him to the tune of five goals in seventeen games - which is a 20+ goal pace stretched over a season - pretty amazing considering his minutes. Yeah, I know, this is the Jasek thread. But in this case, talking about MacEwen is about Jasek. Take away the size and physicality, Jasek is a more rounded player than MacEwen... and he plays centre and he kills penalties. That MacEwen, as one of the most developed forwards in Utica could find some measure of success helps argue for the same possibility for Jasek.
  5. That is a point, but we do have other guys who could become 4Cs - Karlsson, Focht, and Costmar come to mind. The reason I picked Jasek, is that Focht is probably two years away, Karlsson at best a year away, God knows about Costmar. Like always there is a short list at centre for the Canucks in Utica - there’s Jasek and ..., well there could have been Michaelis, but I believe he is playing in Mannheim right now, and he, like Motte is a little undersized at 5’10 180 and not every undersized guy has Motte’s feistiness. The timing and location favours Jasek right now to skate with the black aces... in my humble opinion. Plus the Canucks do need to move cap, and I think injuries on other teams could turn Sutter, Beagle, and Roussel into viable options - the remaking commitment is not too long for a contender needing a replacement, and they are known quantities that won’t hurt any team they might move to.
  6. I don’t think we are too far apart in the direction that we want the Canucks to take, more so on the weighting of the particulars. The biggest thing that helps people up out of the AHL, is injury on the big club. We have been thin in the middle for years, Pettersson, Horvat, Gaudette, Beagle, and the oft injured Sutter. Being a penalty killer, Beagle gets in front of a lot of shots. Next in line last year was Graovac - till he got hurt. Jasek was not ready, now he is. Unfortunately, for Jasek the Canucks picked up Michaelis, but he is in Europe right now, I believe. I’m betting Jasek gets into the black aces, where he’ll be an injury or a virus away from a shot.
  7. Yes, I am aware of Motte's background, are you? Before Motte made to the NHL, he played in the AHL. During those 60 games he got 18 goals and 8 assists for 27 points playing for Rockford and Cleveland. How does that not compare with Jasek's production in the AHL last season: 56 games 14 goals 13 assists. Did I say he was going to replace Motte? What we need is for people like Jasek to replace OVERPAID players in our bottom six: Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, and Sutter. If we are going to carry high paid young stars (Pettersson, Hughes) will be coming up for new contracts and we will pay through the nose to keep them. in our top six we have to find the cap space by economizing on players in the bottom six, which means that we need to develop them. This has already started with MacEwen AND the guy you brought up - Motte. Your example helps to establish MY point.
  8. Rafferty, O.J. Brisbois are under contract but they are not included in our cap, if we want to put them on the ice we have to become compliant and make room under the cap for them to do so.
  9. Wow. Neither of us called Jake lazy, we said he did not consistently compete. Neither of us even mentioned Benning, never mind him being incompetent. I have never said Juolevi is a bust in this or any other thread, I did note that he had trouble pivoting to the left likely due to injury. So, maybe you are the one who should learn to read and stop yammering before you say something even more stupid than you already have. And, the reference to Virtanen grew out of a comparison with Hoglander. Are comparison and contrast now forbidden on this site?
  10. I don’t like that crack, but have to admit it is damned funny. And returning to topic, loved the rush by Jurmo.
  11. True this. What I noted and enjoyed in those two games was that Rafferty got better each shift, he played with Hughes in the third period of his second game. There were a couple of shifts where he and Hughes looked like the defence version of the Sedins - they read each other like they had a psychic connection. Two guys, both elite skaters, who think offence at another level. Just a taste, to be sure - a magical moment. That kind of chemistry, in the NHL, can appear and disappear in a heartbeat, just as soon as the best players and their coaches analyze and neutralize it. But there are times when those connections persist - more often among forwards, much more rarely on D - especially pairings where the D are both elite attackers. The last time we saw that in Vancouver was when Vigneault paired Edler with Ehrhoff and both were at the peak of their offensive game. Yeah, I know, wishful thinking, no doubt. Amazingly, another team has a similar promising situation, at the same time - Makar and Byron.
  12. That is not bashing him, it’s just matter of fact. Virtanen rarely shows that kind of intensity, focus, consistency, or competitiveness. His movement up and down the lineup and variety in the number of minutes he gets reflects that. He is what he is. Physically, he could be a fifteen goal guy or a thirty goal guy, it all depends on what he brings on any given day. It’s not a put down to say a guy is an eighteen goal scorer in an abbreviated season. Just making the NHL is a tremendous achievement... just saying that he could be more. I don’t think this will be a problem with Hoglander, who reminds me of Bure in his psyche. Hoglander strikes me as being driven to be wonderful, just a really intense, determined guy. I think on any day you are going to whatever he has to give.
  13. Jasek had 14g 13a in 57 games and 2 sh goals and a gaudy +15 considering he played mostly in a defensive role, neutralizing the other team’s top centre. Neither skating nor size will keep him out of the NHL. He is a very disciplined player and could easily make the NHL in a fourth line role - think Motte without the physicality, but better skating and more size. Is he likely to make the NHL, well first of all he’d need a chance, and those are hard to come by - especially when you have a 3 million a year guy ahead of him playing on the fourth. With the CCanucks having to economize on bottom six players in the next few years, I believe he has a shot. best way to get inexpensive bottom sixers? Develop them. Having to afford expensive young stars in the top six will help to create spaces for less expensive home grown talent in the bottom six/
  14. Yep. If Virtanen had Smyl’s compete he would be among the league’s elite. If he had Walker’s pound for pound willingness and ability to fight, he’d be the most feared guy in the league.
  15. Lind fit well with our NHL players last year in the AHL - Goldobin, Baertschi, and Boucher (has played in the NHL and was the top scorer in Utica). Lind was almost always deployed with our best players in Utica and looked like he earned that spot. For a winger he took a great portion of our key face offs in eithe the O or D zone, and was very good at it - rarely saw him lose. Sure hope we have an AHL this season - want to see some development in Focht, Lockwood, and Woo.
  16. I put Rathbone and Rafferty at about the same level - Rathbone maybe a bit better defensively and better shot, Rafferty brings more size and professional experience. Both are great skaters and passers.
  17. Of course. If they take him, we clear cap, if they don’t, we have the player. Good either way. Doubt they take a six million dollar man.
  18. Do the black aces not count toward the cap - don’t we have to have cap room to bring them into the lineup? We are still over our cap, are we not?
  19. Who said anyone would? Waiver them to the AHL. No, throwing in valuable assets is not necessary, just demote them. We cannot afford to ‘just ride them out’ we are over the cap and have to become compliant, and we require another D - we need a minimum of 7 and we only have 6 at the moment. We have 15 forwards, which means we have at least one too many.
  20. From what I wrote above: "Demote a player, buy out a player and we are there without dipping into our LTIR." Buy out Baertschi, demote Erickson" = cap compliant, yeah, during the off-season - no deals with others required. We already have zero choice, if we cannot find a trade, we have to reduce cap by 1.6 million. We have fifteen forwards and only six D according to cap friendly, and that includes Rathbone. Buying out Baertschi and demoting Eriksson gets us compliant, but we still have to add a D, say Rafferty. Buying out Baertschi has the following effect "Buying out Baertschi would lower his cap hit to $1.767 million in 2020-21 but add $800,000 on the Canucks’ cap in 2021-22." (Daily Hive) That gets us compliant with a couple hundred thousand to spare. The Canucks will get back about 1.1 milllion by demoting Eriksson. That would allow them to bring in Juolevi or Rafferty - or if Rathbone does not make the team - Juolevi and Rafferty. But that would leave them at only 22 players on the roster and only about 300k in cap space. If Ferland is still on LTIR, they can bring a couple of inexpensive players up from the farm that they want to look at anyway - say two of Hoglander, Bailey or Lind. But they are going to have to do something if they have needs beyond that. Which is move older, high cost players nearer the deadline - when there may be willing takers in other teams that have injuries and LTIR to cover a vet with a relatively high cap.
  21. I have been much too worried about our cap space. Demote a player, buy out a player and we are there without dipping into our LTIR. Do what we have to do to get in compliance. We have young players that we need to see if they can play. In addition, other teams will have injuries and depending on their expectations, some will need to pick up veteran, reliable players to fill spaces and that they can fit into their LTIR. That will create opportunities to move older veteran forwards: Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Benn, and maybe even Pearson. Other teams that are up against the cap will have room because of LTIR - an opportunity for us to move out biggish contracts, get something in return, and transition in younger players that are pushing being ready for the big time. Hopefully, we will have a taxi squad that we can use to polish up our prospects into NHL players. Our young core should continue to improve, and we can find if a younger defender or two can find a spot - Youlevi, Rafferty, Rathbone, Chatfield and even Brisebois come to mind. At forward I expect to see MacEwen, Bailey, Michaelis, Jasek, and Lind compete early. Late in the year, maybe Tryamkin, Podkolzin, and Hoglander may be available. If we have that transition, are we still competing for a playoff spot? I think so.
  22. Who is Cull’s employer? Who is Cull working for? Who signs his cheque? But I do agree that we will have to see what Rafferty brings in the NHL, but his defensive game, I believe, has been criticized unjustly. With the exception of Hughes, it has been a long time since Vancouver brought in a dynamic, young defensive prospect - a potential play driver. I don’t see that in Juolevi - at best, I see a good number three. But amazingly, we have yet another kid coming up in the immediate future, who could also be exceptional in Rathbone. The last time the team had a really dynamic, play driving defence, it was this bunch: Ehrhoff, Edler, Hamhuis, Salo, Bieksa, Ballard, Tanev, and Rome. That team did rather well. The next year, with Ehrhoff defected, both Edler and Bieksa had over 40 points, Hamhuis had 37, and Sal had 25 in 59 games. With Hughes and Schmidt at its core and these young guys coming up, I’m hoping for that kind of push again from the back. Hell, at least I can hope.
×
×
  • Create New...