theo5789
Members-
Posts
10,599 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by theo5789
-
So I guess Gillis bombed the interview.
-
-
Podkolzin, Hoglander, Lind? Even Jake potentially? IMO wing is where we are deepest and it's the easiest position to fill. We are pretty set at center, but could work on depth. Our offense was inconsistent, but we had proven we could score with the best of them even before Toffoli had arrived. He would be a luxury add IMO if we could fit him in. Rathbone, Brisebois, Sautner are all LD and Tryamkin is a left handed RD. There is literally no one ready to take on the hard minutes that Tanev would leave us with (although I am hopeful for Tryamkin in time). We can be optimistic with Woo and Rafferty, but then that's no different than the winger prospects that I've listed in hopes that they pan out. Rafferty won't be getting the offensive opportunities he got in Utica and his defense was what has been in question and Woo is likely a couple of years away. Unless we have a trade in the works for a quality RD (ahem Risto), I'd argue that Tanev should be a top priority. The UFA market doesn't look very good either to replace him and top 4 RD has been a tough position for us to fill. Markstrom was the clear #1 goalie this year. Demko had a good stretch, but to put all the eggs in that basket is tough at this point and could set us way back if it doesn't pan out. Most likely we could sign a vet backup like Griess for around 4 million and split games with Demko. But this is an important position and we have a guy who's at the top of his game right now and relatively cheap (assuming he was around 5.5-6 million a season) compared to many other starters and he wants to be here. I think it's important to retain Markstrom, but there are backup plans that can be made.
-
Unpopular take, I never got the Ballard hate.
theo5789 replied to CanadianRugby's topic in Canucks Talk
AV may have his shortcomings, but he was part of why we got to the Finals, then gone on to the Rangers and also got them to the Finals. The Flyers went from 11th in the East last season to 4th in the East this season with him at the helm. He's got to be doing something right. -
Which further proves Weisbrod's connection in that area of college. Weisbrod also drafted Tim Harrison out of Dexter High School, which also so happens to be where Rathbone was from as well, so further potential connections that Rathbone leans more to Weisbrod.
- 3,880 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Not sure it really "bails" them out. It doesn't cripple their franchise if it happens, but a 7.5 million reduction is cap for 3 years will still be tough to manage.
-
Glad to see another on the same page as I've been for some time now. Toffoli to me was always a luxury piece if we could retain him. He was probably one of the best rentals on the market and we didn't have to give up a 1st to get him (unlike in historical past). If Tanev truly want to remain a Canuck for life, his best course of action is the 1 year deal. His agent surely hates the idea and there is inherent risk in doing so for Tanev, but working with the team like this would likely net him a "lifetime" job with the organization should the worst happen to him, so he would be stable financially. But a one year deal protects him from expansion as we are certainly not going to protect him given what others we most likely will need to protect as well (and there is a risk of him being taken being a veteran top 4 RD that at least has a few good years left in him). He gets to play alongside Hughes who I'd say has rejuvenated him and I think Tanev has relished his leadership role on the team. He gets to see what happens after a year of uncertainty and can lock up a 3-4 year deal after this one still if all things go well of course. He likely will have more support assuming we sign Tryamkin which would keep him healthy longer.
-
I think if this was a major concern, he would've sign in the KHL already.
-
All the successful 1st round picks were all scouts picks and all of the successful late round picks were also scout picks. It's too bad we fired all of our scouts...oh wait...
- 3,880 replies
-
- 3
-
-
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Unpopular take, I never got the Ballard hate.
theo5789 replied to CanadianRugby's topic in Canucks Talk
Yes I've alluded that health concerns were likely the reason why we didn't have Mitchell return. We had signed Hamhuis and Rome and traded for Ballard by July 1st and signed Shane O'Brien on July 6th that we had as an RFA I believe so he would've been insurance for the bottom LD spot. Even if Gillis would have liked to sign Mitchell if he got healthy, he likely had his mind made up that he wasn't going to re-sign already at this point if not earlier. Mitchell may have been a back up plan had Hamhuis signed elsewhere. So I can buy the idea that he may have targeted Ballard as a sure thing, but where we differ is that I believe he was acquired as an insurance for if we could not get Hamhuis. I doubt the plan was to have both Hamhuis and Ballard. Neither player was planned to be a bottom pairing guy with Edler being on the top pair (the price paid for Ballard would suggest that was not the intention of acquiring him). The reason I believe they had some connection was the timing of trades. Hamhuis' rights were traded on June 19th and I believe that is likely when we starting shopping for an LD. Then the rights are traded again for a 3rd pick which seems like a high price that they were going to be aggressive in trying to sign him. Soon after we pull the trigger on the trade. We really only had one top 4 LD spot open, yet we acquired two. I just don't believe that was the intention. So I get the security thing, but I think that was triggered with Hamhuis being moved twice for early negotiations. We can agree to disagree here. -
Unpopular take, I never got the Ballard hate.
theo5789 replied to CanadianRugby's topic in Canucks Talk
It's speculation on my part. I just feel like if we wanted Mitchell back, he would've signed here. So clearly Gillis wanted to wait on Hamhuis and see if he would accept the offer given before deciding on Mitchell. With Hamhuis' rights being dealt twice, they could've been in a spot where they lose Hamhuis, Mitchell walks and we are short a top 4 LD. What would have been the intention of having Ballard with Mitchell/Hamhuis and Edler? There just wouldn't be enough minutes to go around. It just seems they wanted to secure a "top 4" LD in case they didn't get the target they wanted. -
The bomb of a shot from the point is what is most intriguing to me. However, I'd like to know if it's an accurate bomb though otherwise it won't mean much. I don't know if we have anyone on the back line that is considered to have that accurate point shot. Edler has a bomb, but has troubles getting a clean shot through. Hughes has been working on his shot, but I doubt it's anything of note. I miss the days of a solid point shot. I know it's becoming obsolete, but those Salo bombs were a thing of beauty.
- 3,880 replies
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
The bolded in the quote a couple posts up literally states he would not get a signing bonus. All he gets is to be able to burn a year off his ELC.
- 3,880 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Interesting take considering reading the blurbs in that article and none suggest there is a problem with his hockey smarts and yet it's concluded there. I guess if there is improvement, then it's to almost "play down" to his linemates at times as he's getting frustrated that they aren't reading off his plays. The largest viewing time I've had of him was the World Juniors and that was what seemed to be happening. He's making the smart plays, but his linemates couldn't bury the chances after he had opened them up for a scoring chance on several occasions. And that just on the offensive side of things, he's works hard on the backcheck and knows where to be to create turnovers on defense as well.
-
I agree with mostly what you're saying, but who's questioning his hockey IQ? The guy plays a smart and willing defensive game at the ripe age of 18. He was making passes in WJ that players couldn't convert because he was making those plays that the shooters probably didn't think he could/would make. If people are questioning his hockey IQ, then it is an underrated part of his game that they will be surprised with. So with that said, I see him being a JT Miller type player that is likely to be a 60 point player, but has the opportunity to break out being a PPG guy like he has this season. However, I would like to see him improve on his shot to get his goal totals up, but he does have decent hands, so he could be a decent at collecting garbage goals.
-
Luckily for Nikita, it isn't a matter of finding a contract, it's about how much. Some hockey team in the world will want a player like him, it's not trying to find the best deal that suits him now and for future growth. So now I guess the question is does he want long term financial security or does he want to bank on himself on a short term deal with the goal to ear a bigger paycheque down the road.
-
Griess would be the cheapest option, but he's proven that he's at best a very good backup, maybe a 1b, they'd be rolling the dice on him to take over full time starting duties. With that said, he is probably looking at 4.5 million on his next deal if he gets his way. Lehner signed a one year 5 million dollar show me deal. And yes he showed, therefore he's looking likely north of 6 million at this point. I imagine Chicago will be in the hunt for a goalie and Lehner is familiar with them already. Most likely Pittsburgh wants to move out Murray as Jarry took over. Again it would be another gamble to take him on as he wasn't very good. Management is going to sell something because they aren't going to rebuild at this point with what they've spent on players and many of them are pretty much unmovable. It's a no brainer that they have to push on with what they have, but their "core" is getting older. They need more quality cheap talent, but that's easier said than done. Goaltending is a priority and they will have to spend a bulk of what cap they have left to resolve that even before considering adding a top 6 forward. I'd argue that they could use another quality (cheap) dman especially after losing Dillon as well. They could bring Dillon back, but he won't be "cheap" either unless he gives them a Labanc deal.
-
Unpopular take, I never got the Ballard hate.
theo5789 replied to CanadianRugby's topic in Canucks Talk
Yes I know, but his plan was to bank on him hitting UFA. His rights getting traded twice before he got to UFA probably concerned him that he would ever make it there and thus made the trade. Pretty sure Mitchell was never part of the plan moving forward despite many suggesting in hindsight that we should've done so ignoring his age and health concerns. -
You're making it sound so simple. They aren't going to pick a goalie out of thin air. I don't see any better options for them through UFA and they don't have much to trade unless they continue to sell more picks and even then finding a cheap quality goalie is going to be pricey (especially if Demko wouldn't help them). If they buyout Jones, that adds nearly 3 million on top of whatever they pay for the new goalie. So they would have to find a goalie for cheaper than 3 million for any "savings" in goal and they still need a backup. They can reference whatever they want and believe what they want, but the reality is that if they continue to try and be top heavy, their lack of depth will bite them once again eventually. Especially if their older (core) players start getting the injury bug.
-
Lebanc took a team friendly deal likely with the agreement that he would get paid on his next contract as there was no way he would be worth only 1 million after a 56 point season. Buying out Jones would mean they would need to find another goalie. Holtby and Markstrom are the best bet at an upgrade in that position. Holtby will likely cost 8+ million (plus Jones' buyout which would add almost another 3 million). Markstrom may be had for 6 million if he makes if to UFA. They could go for a lesser option, but risk not upgrading in goal and needing a higher end backup to offset some of the cheaper starter cost. Perhaps a trade could be in the works (maybe they have interest in Californian born Demko). The other concern should be that they've been running with cheap depth to fill the roster, but perhaps they need to boost that depth rather continue to try and front load up top as it didn't seem to work out all too well this year, but I guess we will truly see if it's just a one off as they are hoping.
-
[Proposal] EDM and VAN swap overpaid players
theo5789 replied to The_Rocket's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
If it weren't for Myers' neck, that might be the shortest d group in the NHL! -
Jake was on the ice in practice, does that mean he's been cleared to skate and thus clear of covid or is it practice first and find out results later and shut everything down if someone is tested positive?
-
Don't re-sign Stecher and put him in that spot. Tryamkin won't be in the AHL (not because of entitlement, but because he's good enough to not have to go there). Solving our defensive woes will not be put on him singlehandedly nor anyone else we may bring in, that is expecting too much of anyone. Tryamkin adds an element that we don't have (and especially compared to Stecher), so that goes a long way towards building a group that the coaching staff can use towards different situations. To be clear, it may sound like I'm knocking Stecher, but I'm not. Love the guy's heart. If he were willing to play a Biega role and be paid accordingly, I'd keep him in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, he doesn't fit into a regular defensive role for us IMO. I think he would be more suited to a team like Nashville where the top 4 takes on big minutes and Stecher is there to eat up the rest of the minutes and can be called upon to step up into a bigger role if someone goes down. We don't quite have that kind of defense, so we need a bottom pairing that can be relied upon for more minutes (which in turn helps players like Tanev and Edler extend their careers).
-
Adding Lafreniere bolsters the top end of the talent, which pushes down the depth chart allowing more enticing movable pieces that help clear cap in package deals. I'd say adding a Lind/Hoglander/2nd would easily free us from a Baertschi/Benn/Sutter/Roussel (LE is in a different ballpark of course) while those type of prospects would become available when set on wing with a player like Lafreniere on wing. His ELC and potential boost to the group is "cap savings" as well. It would open up moving players that showed decently like Pearson to trade instead to open up cap space. The marketability of a 1st overall and revenue from merch sold to season tickets purchased because of adding a 1st overall player that this franchise has not had the luxury of doing so is another aspect to consider aside from the on ice stuff as well. With all this said, perhaps Montreal isn't the right trading partner (albeit it would be beneficial for them market-wise to get Lafreniere). Would Ottawa trade picks 3 and 5 (plus something else like Lassi Thomson) for Lafreniere? Would Buffalo consider something like 1st overall + LE for 8th overall + 1st in 2021 + Risto (which would boost our defense)? I think I would seriously consider those options if they were available.