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

theo5789

Members
  • Posts

    10,599
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by theo5789

  1. Up to 4 years, I'd be comfortable (and hopefully reasonable dollars). I think Hughes takes a lot of pressure off of him by being able to get the puck out of the zone with control. I thought Tryamkin would arrive this season as an upgrade to Stecher and could also ease some RD minutes on the PK, but he could arrive the following season instead. These are the key areas that forces the injuries IMO.
  2. I don't think many were suggesting that Tryamkin would replace Tanev though. I think the idea was he would be an upgrade to Stecher and could be trusted more on the PK (Nikita was the top RD on his KHL team) and ease some of Tanev's minutes there and allow Myers to focus on the even strength time. I agree with the rest though.
  3. I just don't see a viable replacement and Tanev wants to be here. We would get the best valued contract from a top 4 RD. A trade won't come cheap and he's the most affordable UFA option and I'd argue that he's in the top 3 available this offseason anyway.
  4. If we make the playoffs, the value we paid for Toffoli is paid off. The reason we added him was because we were thought to have lost Boeser for the remainder of the season and didn't want that news to hurt the team's confidence after the season they had put up so far. Re-signing him is gravy and a luxury if we are able to fit him in. I don't see him as a necessity for the team. It's fun to see a high powered offense, but without the balance, it won't be an effective team in the long haul. Defensive depth is always tested come playoff time.
  5. Rathbone is an LD, so I don't think his arrival will affect Tanev's spot. Having a top heavy offense and relying on goaltending to bail out a defense that would only be worse without Tanev (and assuming we are throwing in a rookie) seems very much like the Toronto model that can be entertaining and work well enough in the regular season (in fact Toronto is desperate for a player like Tanev). It won't be effective come playoff time. I don't know if Tanev is the answer, but I would focus on upgrading the defense and removing Tanev without a viable replacement is taking a step back from that.
  6. FYI, Chatfield is an RD. In that scenario, it is more likely Brisebois that takes the LD spot and he was Rafferty's partner and looked decent in Utica. Juolevi and Rathbone would be in the mix as well. Chatfield would be battling Rafferty for that bottom pair RD (assuming Stecher isn't back) or 7/8 spot with Woo being a long shot. With that said, if we don't re-sign Tanev, we will need to replace him. So it's either we pay him his 5 million +/- or will be replacing him with someone around the same dollar value or more. I think we don't complicate things and take away a partner that Hughes is comfortable with and simply keep Tanev. Of course there are D that can play both sides and that could change things up should Green be comfortable doing so.
  7. Yeah I haven't written off Juolevi next year, but I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if he gets a spot out of camp. With his waiver eligibility along with needing more ice time, I suspect that he at least starts in Utica. There is a lot of competition on LD.
  8. Except we will be able to plan better for next year knowing what to expect. Sutter, Benn, Baertschi and Spooner's buy out, plus possibly Pearson will be off the books by then. Edler may take a cheaper deal as well. Could buy out one year left of Eriksson/Roussel/Beagle if we can't offload them to save more cap. As soon as there is more clarity on what the future holds, it'll be easier to plan out.
  9. You must've never seen players like Marek Malik or Taylor Pyatt play.
  10. I think people are also worrying too much that Seattle may take him. We have seen plenty of times last expansion that there were actually decent goalies available, but weren't taken. It depends on their strategy. For example Buffalo had Nilsson who was 26 who just posted a .923 sv% season and had a 23 year old Ullmark that they passed on for Carrier. Or passing on 24 year old NHL starter Mrazek for 24 year old AHLer Nosek. Or passing on Raanta (who was flipped for a 1st rounder a few days after the draft) for Lindberg. Or passing on the highly coveted Garrett Sparks for the infamous Leipsic . So it's very possible (barring a great year from Demko), that they pass on a would be then 25 year old goalie (most recently with a .909 sv%) for say someone like Gadjovich (22 years old) if he has a decent season in Utica next year and if left unprotected. It's really going to depend on who's available and what their game plan will be. It's not a sure thing that Demko is taken. Right now we have to protect Horvat, Miller, EP, Boeser and likely Gaudette and Virtanen. If we sign Toffoli, he will take that last spot. That could leave someone like Kole Lind exposed as well who would be very enticing as well. If Demko isn't taken, then your timeline still fits him in. Sure Demko may want to expedite himself, but if as you say in 4 years, Demko will be 28 and splitting games with Marky as his mentor (Demko just had his first taste as a backup). That's about when Marky started breaking out. Of course having the contingency of DiPietro allows us to explore trading him should the right deal come along. I think this goaltending "security" allows us to not have to force a trade to get maximum value and also not be concerned if that's the sacrificial lamb that we give up.
  11. You mean besides the fact that that he really wanted to come back this year and have said they'll try again next year?
  12. You're right that the situation is likely his own doing by going back. But we don't really know the true reason for his return as it was also hinted as family reasons as well and family should always come first (which is a character thing which is also shown in him honouring his contracts). However both sides seemed to want to make it work and without all the uncertainty of what's going on right now, I believe it would've happened already.
  13. Answered your own question, but not just him as they've been looking for any angle to rip on Benning as well.
  14. It's CDC, there was a big fuss over Jordan Subban, Hunter Shinkaruk, etc. Tryamkin is actually in the upper echelons of players that many have debated over here IMO.
  15. The cap issue has changed due to Covid. There were projections of a pretty big jump of the cap this coming season prior to this. This would've given more breathing room, plus more flexibility in moving contracts. There was no indication of a flat cap on a few months ago. So of course plans have had to change and things are still changing. We signed vets to insulate the prospects and to give them competition (not the LE signing though, that was for a different reason IMO) and simply the team has surged back up much quicker than expected (with the help of nailing many picks that were ready to jump start the new core). This IMO is clearly showing that the system Benning had to develop the prospects (on top of drafting them) is working extremely well. So yes there is work to be done to make everything fit now, but the situation isn't dire and there are many teams that are facing this issue, not just us. Even cap floor teams like Ottawa are going to feel this crunch as they weren't likely drawing much revenue, so even their internal cap will take a hit. The cap issue that we are seeing is a league-wide problem (unfortunately for this year's batch of UFAs and RFAs).
  16. I think some forget the fact that ever since they changed the lottery system just as we hit our lowest point that we have actually dropped the most spots in the draft order of any other team in the 1st round. We weren't gifted anything (aside from teams not doing their due diligence and letting quality players slip to us) and had to earn the rewards. It's funny how they attribute our standings to our success in drafting and completely ignore teams like Edmonton and Buffalo (looking for any excuse to not give Benning any credit). Benning understood the importance of development on top of drafting in which is why we signed vets to insulate and give competition so they wouldn't be rushed. They don't appreciate that we have an owner willing to pay to support this. Our cap situation is simply a reflection of the team improving much faster than expected, so yes we have some work to do around the cap. The team is now on the upswing (in relatively short order no less) and yet there's always something wrong. It's easy to trash any and every GM because they've all made mistakes, but when you step back and look at the bigger picture (rather than microscope), you can see we are moving in a positive direction.
  17. Manny is just getting the boys ready for how the NHL will really treat them. Gotta battle through adversity!
  18. Possibly, but Edler and Myers seemed to have formed some chemistry and are the big time regular minute players together. If Rathbone lives up to the hype, then I suppose the minutes could be balanced out. Alternatively Tanev (assuming he's back) could help shelter the next rookie in Rathbone/Juolevi, Myers could potentially play with Hughes (although it didn't seem to work as well so far) leaving Edler with Stecher/Rafferty. I could see a Brisebois and Stecher pairing that could look decent as well as a true 3rd pairing. Many options, hopefully something works. Starting to look like a bit of a logjam on LD though.
  19. Well if that were the case, then we would want Kole Lind to join the list and have a successful career despite being injury prone to start Although I'm not quite sure Lind is classified as injury prone as far as I can tell.
  20. Agree with Tanev. If Stecher signs, he pretty much locks in that bottom RD spot. Although I think it's more likely we let Stecher test UFA with Rafferty as insurance and if Stecher can get a deal, then he would sign here for cheaper (although he could bypass that and just sign a cheaper deal if he wants to stay here). On LD, Benn and Rathbone for sure and also Brisebois IMO who will need waivers next year. Brisebois and Rafferty had shown good chemistry in the AHL, but not sure we would have them both win out the bottom pairing role. So if Rafferty does make the team, he's probably partnered with Benn. If Stecher stays, then Rathbone and Brisebois have a better shot of making it. Rathbone and Stecher would be a smaller duo though and not sure if that would be favourable.
  21. The player with the biggest gain from this is Rafferty. This will be his big break. We still likely will not be able to afford Stecher unless he takes a massive discount to stay. This news IMO bumps Tanev into the top priority signing if it wasn't already. RD just got weak again and it was already a weak position.
  22. I think the OP is specifically looking for players who were injury prone prior to playing in the NHL from my understanding. Clearly with Juolevi in mind, but I can't tell if the OP is trying to write off OJ or looking for positive examples.
  23. Eriksson keeps getting himself back into the lineup. For someone that many have claimed to have checked out, he seems to be battling hard for a spot still. You don't find yourself on the PK for being lazy. I wonder if the plan is to have Beagle take all of the PK draws and swap in a couple of wingers when they get a chance.
  24. Leave it to CDC to simultaneously say he's a terrible player and also criticize Benning for not getting him signed.
×
×
  • Create New...