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. Hall certainly hasn't lived up to the billing for them so far. I think having a dependable goaltender gives the team a bit more confidence moving forward. When the goalies aren't trusted, everyone sort of bunkers back in support instead having that confidence of a goalie that should have your back. It may not be solely on him, but the team had been flying when he was in the lineup and dipped while he's been out. Hall was traded for around the same time though, so perhaps their game plan had changed as well with his addition that has had a negative effect.
  2. Why does Schaller need to provide that or he's out? MacEwen may throw a few hits, but Bailey doesn't play that game and neither player PKs. Schaller plays a more valuable role especially with Motte out and the fact that Schaller has been our 2nd most utilized player on the PK when he's in the lineup. Schaller has thrown less than a hit per game average, so it seems like a set up for unwarranted disappointment. I don't think he has that short of a leash on the AHL callups.
  3. OEL would be a major loss if it's serious, but I think they've tailed off since Kuemper went down. Will be interesting to see how they perform once he returns (and hopefully for them OEL isn't out long term).
  4. It would also make things interesting in the offseason as we could maybe explore trading Roussel as well this offseason to open up cap space who might be a more palatable option to some teams.
  5. Looks like JD Burke continues to prove that he has no idea what he's talking about.
  6. And we might have more options in the summer if LE continues his play and maybe even has a decent playoffs. Then they can enjoy that dead weight because no team is taking him on otherwise just like how we can't find a taker for Sven even for free. I guess we will have to see how LE continues to perform up until the TDL.
  7. If this is true, then I'll take more than a 7th rounder please. With that said, Schaller's biggest asset is his PK duties, something neither Ferland or Leivo possess. We don't know Ferland's progression and how he will be when he returns and Leivo has been listed out pretty much right around TDL time (so if it's before, then I'd try to trade him for said low pick and if it's after, then roster limits are lifted anyway, so all we would gain from moving Schaller is trying to bank under 500k of his cap at the cost of a player with some reasonable value to our current team). I'd like to see if/when Tryamkin returns before deciding on moving out Virtanen. I'd like to see what Jake's contract demands are (I think he comes around 3.25 million on a 3 to 4 year deal, which would be good value for us or in a future trade). If Virtanen nets us Ristolainen, I'd consider it, but I still think I'd wait until the offseason when it is more clearer on our roster picture and cap room.
  8. Fair assessment. I kind of forgot to subtract a year of their contract remaining after this season and thus thinking both guys had one more year on their deals left. With that said, I still think we explore the idea in the offseason rather than this TDL simply for chemistry sake and to see how this team performs in the playoffs should we make it there. See how far this LE experiment can take us. If LE has indeed found a spot that he can hang onto in our lineup, then I hardly see that being a detriment and just starts boosting his value more. We pretty much cannot avoid 5-6 million for the next season, but we can try to get the most value out of that 5-6 million on our team now as opposed to it being pure dead weight. I just feel by the time we hit that final year of LE, it won't be as big of a burden and we will have several options on how to proceed. Certain a risk-reward consideration involved here.
  9. I think he's suggesting which players he's okay with moving (one or two to clear up space), not suggesting he'd move all of them.
  10. He had been recently interviewed and said that he wants to see what this group can do. In other words, he's backed off the looking for another top 6 forward talk (although that could've motivational talk to the guys internally that there is still room to grow). Also I think with LE finding a nice niche right now has also allowed us to back away from looking to add.
  11. I'm not opposed to a deal for the same reason as you mentioned, but it would be an offseason move if so rather than a trade deadline deal. Unless it's a deal that can't be passed up (which again is unlikely to happen at the TDL anyway). I doubt they are going to have a good enough gauge on Bailey in potentially a brief time up if he even draws into the lineup (I think Schaller is in and only one of Bailey or MacEwen on the 4th line, which MacEwen is better suited for) to make such a big decision like moving Virtanen who is finally blossoming and may finally have a chance to see how he performs in the playoffs. The only moves I see happening are the "trim the fat" deals, but there needs to be willing takers. Schaller may have value, but for the same reasons why we would value him. Virtanen hasn't seen a lick of PK time this year and suddenly he's ready for it should someone go down? (Although I agree that he should start getting some reps there in the future, but perhaps after his contract extension as he doesn't need more ammo to up his value ) Right now, it's pretty obvious that it's Miller/Horvat/Pearson are the guys drawing into the PK when injuries happen. Motte, Beagle, Sutter, Eriksson are the primary PK guys (Schaller is amongst the top when he's in the lineup). If we are looking at the playoffs seriously, having Schaller is more valuable than a 7th round pick and minimal cap space. A team needs to buy Schaller from us rather than us sell him (eg I'll take a 3rd round pick to pry him off us at this point).
  12. I think worrying 3 years from now is looking too far ahead (in terms of the value of losing LE now or not) especially when considering there will be a bunch of expiring deals and the cap rising. Backes could be literal dead weight holding us down for the next 2 years for sure. That's a big risk on two years where our cap is in most question. It might be something to explore in the offseason if it's being considered. Making this move now would affect chemistry while still taking on a big risk. Not worth it unless they make it worthwhile.
  13. As you pointed out, that team made it to game 7 of the finals. I'd argue that we have to be careful with our physical play because we were in control until Rome's hit that they rallied around. Arguable that this is where the turnaround happened for the Bruins. On top of that Hamhuis throws a hip check that takes himself out of the series. On that note, our team had team toughness that year, just maybe not truculence (like breaking a guys back, although there were some massive hits and physical play from us in that run too). We have that team toughness this year as well, so we will see how it plays out if/when we make the playoffs.
  14. What if Loui has enough value in a retained trade and thus we only carry say half his cap? That gives more flexibility in a time that we need it as opposed to the final year where our cap constraints won't be as high with expiring contracts and replacing them with youth and cap increases. Backes' cap is of negative value to Boston while LE is not quite there. We'd be taking on real dead weight if he can't perform which he is clearly showing he isn't capable of on a top level team and hoping he gets hurt to put on LTIR (because he's deemed as healthy now)?
  15. Unless the concern with Virtanen is that he will be asking too much on his next contract, there is no real reason to move him. It also goes against what Benning has suggested about chemistry of the team. Of course if there is a deal that could bolster our team, then sure, but that will be an offseason decision surely. Many of us have been wanting to see what Virtanen can do in the playoffs. This could very well help us decide how to move forward with Jake. Now of course this doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things but moving out two BC boys in a deal is not going to be good optics lol. I have no problem moving out Baertschi. We have depth coverage for him in Bailey, Goldy, Perron, Lind, etc. The only sticking point of moving Schaller is what I've been saying all along. If we lose Motte, Beagle or whichever PKer, who draws in? We take away from the top 6 by moving Miller and/or Horvat into that role? It hurts our depth for playoff hopes. I believe roster limits are lifted after the trade deadline and correct me if I'm wrong that we would only be saving a pro-rated amount of his cap of just under 500k. If we are that close to the cap where 500k makes or breaks us next season, then I guess that's where it adds value in moving him rather than keeping his value to us on a potential playoff drive.
  16. Did you watch the documentary? They seemed to indicate surgery was the best option (of course he would have the best doctors/surgeons working with him). I certainly have no knowledge in regards to this aside from what I saw from the McDavid documentary which made it seem like what he did was "groundbreaking" and against what doctors had originally recommended, but simply to get him back on the ice as soon as possible and still be on top of his performance. But like I said, I suppose having the top facilities and staff to work with him provides a different outlook and outcome as opposed to regular joes.
  17. Backes' concussion history pretty much puts his toughness and jam at Ferland's level. Simply not knowing where it can be at this point. Considering that is a big aspect of his game, it makes him nearly ineffective if he can't play a significant role otherwise. Right now they are hooped with Backes and they either have him buried in the minors for the rest of his contract if they can't find a taker or they take on LE's contract and a player that seemingly can play a role on the team. If they feel like Backes' contract is more palatable, then that's their problem to keep. We certainly would need to add had this deal been considered last offseason. Right now, there's really no chance that we make the move, unless they make it worthwhile for us as our player is contributing.
  18. A legit 2nd pairing guy with size isn't going to be acquired with what we are trying to sell (I haven't been following the conversation you are having with the other posters, but I'm assuming we are taking about Stecher, Schaller, Baertschi, etc). Our best bet at this is bringing back Tryamkin. I believe Benning has already said he isn't moving the younger assets at this point until he has a clearer picture of what we have in this current team. So I agree with trimming the fat, but who's buying and does it hurt our chances of giving the best run possible? I'm not trading Stecher unless we know Tryamkin is returning and I'm not trading Schaller unless we have a reasonable depth replacement for the PK in which Ferland, Leivo, Bailey and MacEwen all unfortunately do not provide at the same level currently. Perhaps they can be worked on, but that will be an offseason/preseason project where Schaller stays and simply we let walk as UFA which is no big deal (if all we are looking at is a 7th round pick in return anyway).
  19. And Sutter did just that as exampled. Pearson stood up for his teammates earlier in the year. I think if it comes down to it, that we have a team prepared to do so. At the end of the day, the important part is we win the game/series no matter how we get there.
  20. It's certainly an interesting idea because his contract ends a year earlier than LE. Problem is LE is playing a significant role right now and Backes might just be done. I certainly wouldn't add anything and I think at this point, I'd expect them to add. Too much shakeup to the chemistry of the team though for a trade deadline type move. Might explore this in the offseason though.
  21. I think it's unlikely we will be bringing in guys. I can see us trying to off load some players to create roster/cap space, but not at the cost of the best possible chance in the playoffs should we make it. This is why I can't see us trading Schaller unless of course he asks to be moved. I could see Leivo go on a conditioning stint (if he isn't back early enough to try and trade him) hopefully to extend the time long enough where the roster limits are lifted I believe after the trade deadline. Don't know the math involved though if we can fit all this under the cap this season.
  22. My only issue with this is who of those 4 would you put in a PK role should our regulars go down (we have seen recently after losing Motte and potentially Beagle, Sutter is fragile, presumably we want to keep Miller and Horvat in offensive situations more and not wear them down). I think Schaller still provides depth in an area that is important. All four of those guys are in a similar situation and almost is too much depth. Unfortunately Leivo is hurt as he would've been the one that I would've moved out for a low pick as we are unlikely able to fit him in next season as well. MacEwen is likely the next guy in line for PK IMO, but he is raw at the NHL level and is certainly a downgrade atm to Schaller.
  23. While I agree with your stance, that simply isn't the style we have been playing and as Roussel has reiterated that we shouldn't be changing what has been successful for us of late. We shouldn't be playing to the opponents strengths and continue playing to ours. Of course the intensity will go up and I expect the after whistle scrums and such, but I'm not concerned about that. If we continue to play a game where we keep skating and using our speed to get behind the defense (there's a reason why we have one of the most penalties drawn this season), then we will be in a better position. Once we start breaking our system because we are chasing the opponents for retaliation, then we will be playing into their hands. This isn't playing "soft" as I've pointed out earlier that we have built a team that should hopefully withstand the physical intensity uptick, but it's playing with control and knowing what the end game is. There was a game earlier in the season when we were popping in crucial goals and the team wasn't too caught up in celebrations (not to say they're a bad thing), and to me it showed focus on the task at hand and getting the job done rather than being caught up in emotions. It's a natural instinct to want to go tit for tat, but you have to know when to engage or not or sometimes just give them a smile back which could irk them more (something noted from one of the Jake mic'ed up sessions).
×
×
  • Create New...