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. Contracts come and go, we will be fine. We have plenty expiring next year too. Signing Lockwood is no different than signing a college FA.
  2. Congrats to the Horvats. Must've really celebrated that captaincy announcement. Oh captain my captain indeed!
  3. Karlsson does have 36 points in 49 games (which is 2nd on his team) which would put him at the highest point producing dman. I'd argue he'd have even more with the way our offense had been rolling too as compared to SJ. Now of course comes the cap space and potential decline. When I originally wanted him, I didn't project him to cost as much as he ended up getting (and didn't want to trade for him). The market went a bit nuts. I was expecting more around 9.5. If we had signed him to that, then subtract Myers and Ferland and we are in the same cap situation. So we would lose some size, but Karlsson easily handles Myers' minutes and more and Ferland is out anyway (of course this wouldn't have been known at the time of the signing). As for declining, that's something that has to be seen over time because he hasn't declined IMO yet and many dmen (good ones anyway) have been able to extend their careers into their late 30s at a reasonably top level still. Now of course had we signed EK, Hughes may not get the same opportunities that's he's being given now, so there is that negative effect, but his cap worry is also lessened. If we could afford Myers and Ferland for the next 4 years, surely we could've made it work with EK's cap. Of course I had projected less and with the additional 2 million makes it that much harder, so in hindsight (although Benning knew we were out of the running well before with his comments during his UFA time, so he had a better knowledge of what kind of deal was expected to make it happen) it would've been challenging to fit him in long term.
  4. In other words, why should the Canucks give up on him now and simply see what they can get out of him as we have already invested a 3rd round pick on him? If he accomplishes nothing, then unless we had another prospect that should've taken his place, it's really no loss and no risk. Top college FAs may be less inclined to sign here in the future when it becomes harder and harder to crack our roster anyway, so one developmental spot taken up isn't going to be the end of the world.
  5. Have to factor in desire to stay or try something new and also cost of living and taxes. It's not simply what's the max money that can be made. There's probably union dues and other costs as well that I don't know if they have the same in the KHL.
  6. Hopefully if we can convince him and Linus Karlsson to come over next season, that would be a quick boost to our Utica depth at center. I believe Focht could be joining us next year as well.
  7. The point was development. Many were dumping on Utica because a few first year prospects weren't "developed" into NHLers 10 games into the season as 20 year olds playing pro for the first time. Some suggest college players are developing better, but they are coming in a year or two older and playing against peers that are also a year or two older. But this stance seems to be dumping on the AHL system rather than Utica itself because if the argument is that college development is better, then we should just scrap Utica altogether in that case because what's the point of farm teams then? However, we are actually seeing progression pretty much amongst every prospect right now going through our system. Will they all make the NHL? Who knows, but our prospects are young and we are only just starting to get a real influx of quality prospects going through the system (the previous quality ones like Demko and Jake are already graduated). How many prospects that have been willing to put in the work here have been failed by the Utica system?
  8. I think the family issues were the reason why he was adamant about going to Yekaterinburg. I think this time with the possibility of him moving again that him and his wife are more ready for the challenge of a move wherever they may end up. If they're willing to move to a "new" country, surely a new city in their own country wouldn't be a reach. Maybe he wouldn't get as much money as he would here, but he gets to stay in a country where his wife is more comfortable (language and all that) and try to squeeze more money in a offer for a player coveted by the NHL. All signs seem to point an eventual return and I'm really hoping he does. But I'm also trying to set myself up in case he doesn't and not be too upset about it. Whatever decision he makes, I wish him the best.
  9. In May of 2017, the Univeristy of Notre Dame announced that Cal Petersen was forgoing his final year of college eligibility in order to sign an NHL contract. That notice started the clock on the Sabres’ ability to sign Petersen, which they were of course unable to do. Good thing we draft players with good character. And we have some players with connections to him in our system. And we committed to him when many didn't. Hopefully this all goes in our favour in getting him locked up with us.
  10. I'm aware of all this and also mentioned them to other posters as well. I just have this 1% of doubt that he could be using us as a negotiation tactic to squeeze out more money and maybe he really wants to stay in the KHL wherever it may be. I guess it's just a part of me that doesn't want to get my hopes up too high, so I want to give myself that bit of doubt.
  11. Apparently law of averages is what is making players successful, not development.
  12. Are you suggesting he won't come here as well? Because if he's willing to leave to come here, then surely he's willing to go anywhere else that pays the bills. If it's not about the money, then he simply re-signs there, but could be using us to squeeze out a few more dollars. I'm not suggesting that he doesn't want to come here though. Just expressing my one concern despite all the evidence that makes him likely to return.
  13. But Luke would hold an NHL spot that we don't currently have anyway. We pick him up and waive him and Tampa claims him back and it's pointless anyway. We will deal with whatever issue if/when they injured (knock on wood) and there will be plenty of Luke Schenns available and I doubt a Luke Schenn is going to make the difference for us if we lose a key player. People quickly forget how terrible he once recently was and now he's back to the AHL once again.
  14. Lind is a major success story this far in terms of improvement. But look at players like Juolevi, Jasek, Gadjovich, Brisebois, etc. Have they not all improved? That's called development, something critics suggested that Utica was incapable of simply because a few players weren't instant stars as soon as they stepped on the ice in the AHL and a couple of guys that didn't want to tough it out. We are only just starting to have enough depth to force players to steep longer and have prospects that are decent enough to develop through our system as well (we will soon see the likes of Woo, Focht, Keppen, Lockwood, etc also go through the system). Players like Boucher and Bailey are AHL veterans and they hold a different standard than those who are 20 or so entering their first season into the league. There are certainly players that don't have as good numbers as the AHL vets and perform better because it isn't linear in that context. Lind is performing almost as well as players 3-5 years older than him.
  15. Has it been that clear cut? If he (and his wife) are willing to move all the way out here, why isn't moving to another part of their home country out of the question (where his young wife might be more comfortable and to a team that can pay him)?
  16. His current team cannot match it, but doesn't mean another team couldn't. I must've missed the talk of him wanting to play in the best league in the world.
  17. Nevermind the fact that his name is Gunnarwolfe. That's a 1st round pick name.
  18. We have shown time and again that if young players earn a spot out of camp that management will make room for them. Whatever contracts in the way need to outplay the youth and not get waived.
  19. That is the part that stat watchers need to be careful of. They need to understand the context of the situation and have reasonable expectations. Whether or not he fizzles out in his development time to make it to the NHL is moot, I can't see the Canucks not wanting to see what they can get out of him. Lockwood's side has said all the right things about joining the team that drafted him and we are known to draft character players. He may want a game to burn a year of ELC and I have no problem with that, it's standard. It only puts more pressure on himself to develop quicker and not get bypassed by other prospects.
  20. Glad to hear both players on after hours giving praise to Green and the coaching staff. The players seem to respect and trust the coaches. Hopefully the fanbase follows suit soon.
  21. I don't know of any team that doesn't depend on good goaltending for success.
  22. I'm still laughing at those that said Utica can't develop.
  23. I would say the only concern I have is that he is using us as a negotiating tool, but he really wants to stay in the KHL. I know all the signs suggesting that he would return, but that's the only worry I have.
  24. Jasek seems to be a very under the radar prospect. Swapped to center and playing top 6 minutes. Bailey and Lind seem to be going right now too, so Jasek can't be too out of place there. Smart move to get a head start on him at center as early as training camp/preseason.
×
×
  • Create New...