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. Much happier that Loui is finding a way to contribute rather than us simply burying him to only save a million of cap space while adding a whole lot of drama.
  2. If that line continues the way they're going, I could see Gaudette being sat out when Ferland returns. Gaudette has had a good season, cooled off a bit lately. Eriksson has been earning his spot on the roster right now. Many have been calling for chemistry for the lines and they are showing good chemistry lately playing shutdown and providing solid secondary scoring.
  3. I think he would be able to come for prospects camp. I believe we have seen players under contract in other leagues participate (assuming their respective teams allow them to). I think when their camps start though, they are obligated to return back. So I don't see why he wouldn't be allowed to train here, but it might not be a "Canuck" specified training, instead just him coming over here and choosing to train. Burrows and others play summer Ball hockey and Boeser plays in the summer league. But they don't get paid to play those I imagine which would be another contractual thing. I think as long as they return back to camp healthy, they can do whatever they want. They have to tell the team of any injuries outside and that might affect things should they get hurt doing something beyond what's obligated to the contracted team.
  4. Points, it's all about the points. +/- when the points don't fit their argument. The reality is defensive players never get the limelight despite their importance.
  5. This is where my point ends. I have not questioned any reasoning by Kassian for his actions. Do you think punching a guy while he is down as hard as you can is dangerous? If yes, then that's my point.
  6. I've talked to him as well and I never got that interpretation from him. Seems like an over-exaggeration and nothing this year seems to indicate that. Edler had some bad +/- years as well and bounced back when the team got better. Similar circumstances IMO.
  7. I believe I said that. I think you (amongst others) are misinterpreting what I was trying to say from the start. I've never questioned the justifications of the actions or not. I understand that Tkachuk is a dirty player. People have been calling out Tkachuk as a dangerous player though and I feel like punching someone as hard as you can when someone is down is just as dangerous of an act. This is why fighters in the league usually let up once the player has gone down (also part of the "code"). Kassian didn't. This is a dangerous act. Praising Kassian for a dangerous act is contradictory when calling out someone else for being dangerous. You may think Kassian is some hero giving it to someone who "deserves" it and that's fine, that isn't what I am debating about. I think what Kassian did was right, but at the same time I think he went overboard (and thus got his suspension). Kassian was lucky it wasn't a 7 minute PP (2 for instigating and a fighting major), but his 4 minutes still contributed towards their team losing the game. He may have won the battle, but they lost the war.
  8. I think it'll take more than that personally. If that's all that it would take, then I think that trade is already made by now.
  9. Have to wonder what the reaction would be here had someone hit Baertschi (concussion history) in a similar fashion. I think it's an overreaction by Perreault, but I can see why he would be upset in the heat of the moment towards player safety. He acknowledges that he's the "smallest guy on the ice", so he has to know the disadvantages of being a player of his stature where bigger players will catch him (by accident too) sometimes. You don't get an advantage of player safety because you're smaller. The league has already made it easier to allow skillful smaller players to excel in this league.
  10. Lockwood's progress was delayed because of his injuries. He played a full college season last year was near PPG. I never projected him as a top 6 forward though, so IMO the points are not a big concern, but it has dipped this year after offensive players had left. He's a complimentary player and that's fine. Tyler Motte went through the same program and is no more than a 4th liner at the moment despite putting up college points, so who really knows how these things project. If Lockwood becomes a solid defensive specialist, there's nothing wrong with that either, but I don't know if he's ever utilized in this way or not, but something that could maybe help make a career out of him (like helping Jake out to play the defensive side and likely will extend his NHL career). Perhaps he becomes a poor man's Cogliano. Gaudette was listed at 170 lbs when coming out of college (and still is listed at that) and no one is concerned for his "man strength". Lockwood is shorter and listed at 172 lbs. I feel like he's got some NHL tools that is worth a look a little longer and too see if we can make a player out of him. His speed alone is something that is of value in today's NHL. I don't think he is a waste of a contract space as some believe.
  11. Gaud is currently in a sheltered 3C role. Risto plays nearly 30 minute nights. His green jackets are because he gets the toughest minutes against on a tire fire team. They have been better this year and his +/- has been fine. If we had Ristolainen, I would never trade him for Gaudette assuming you're talking straight up. And if we add on top of Gaudette, it would take a significant add IMO.
  12. I asked SabreFan1 before what they were looking for and he doesn't even seem to know either. But I can't imagine them going through a fire sale and losing a top pairing RD that eats a lot of minutes in a rebuild type trade. Gaudette doesn't hold that value at this point IMO and a 1st 3 drafts from now doesn't really do much IMO either (but can you imagine the crowd that hates trading 1sts and worry they will be lottery winning picks?)
  13. Before anyone panics, this is pretty standard. A lot of players don't want the distraction of in season contract negotiations, so they can focus on their season rather than look too far ahead into the future.
  14. Alex Grenier was prominent in the AHL and fizzled any time he stepped into the NHL. Hopefully Bailey is just a late bloomer rather than a good AHL player. Maybe Benning's comments about looking for another top 6 guy has motivated some players internally. Benning never said it had to be acquired through trade.
  15. Unless they're in the media of course. Then all logic goes out the window.
  16. They aren't really in rebuild mode. That 1st is too far away. Gaudette might interest then, but not enough to give up a minute munching top pairing dman that puts up 40+ points a year.
  17. Which is why I said it's easier said than done to acquire. We have Woo and Tryamkin as potential top 4 RD. If a solid RD lands around where we are drafting, go for it. But if there's an impressive center, then I wouldn't avoid that. We may end up with too much center depth, but that's how you build the tradable quality assets to make the trades easier to accomplish.
  18. What are you willing to give up and what are their needs are the questions that need to be answered? I like Ristolainen, but they seem to want to make it work there. I imagine the typical price of 1st (or 2nd), a prospect like Madden or Hoglander or Woo, and a roster player of need for them to get them thinking. Even then it might not be enough for a top pairing RD.
  19. There's a chance that none of of prospects pan out in 3 years if that's the concern. We drafted Woo to be a top 4 dman. Tryamkin is playing top pair in the KHL (not saying that equates to top pairing here, but he can log the minutes). Myers is playing top 4. Like I said, if there is one available in the draft then go for it, but don't miss out on BPA over positional needs. Trading for a top RD in the league isn't going to be as easy said than done. We have players that we can work with that can hopefully allow us to balance out the minutes over the 3 pairings. It's a position we should always be looking to improve like any other position, but I don't see any real need to hinder the team (depleting assets/depth in other positions in a trade to fill this spot or eat up a ton of cap) when we have players in our system to look at first.
  20. Never said Brogan is an NHL player now, but he looks to have progressed to a point where people feel he's an NHL player soon at 24 years old. I get the forwards peaking earlier comment, but Lockwood was a decent complimentary player when he had decent linemates (much like Motte). I like to know how he's handling the defensive side of the game and how he's handling his physical play. His speed was always very good, but he almost played a reckless style that got him hurt, but also made him effective. If he spends the year strengthening his often injured areas, then that makes him that much better (he didn't seem to miss any college games last season). Contract space is always an issue, but we certainly leave spaces for development, so I guess it depends on if we have enough room. We have 27 contracts signed for next year, about 10 more added to ice an NHL roster. David Pope is likely gone. And we may move on from Boucher and who knows with Goldobin and Perron or Bailey. Of course there will be other young players and other possible college free agents. I think we have invested in him and he wants to be here, so I don't see why we wouldn't use a developmental spot to see if we can get a player out of him. OJ missed time with injuries, but we continue to work with him. I think if the talent is there (I like Lockwood's speed and tenacity), they will try and work with them to overcome any issues.
  21. Or have a balanced D group where everyone can play rather than rely on one pairing. Ride the hot hand. Look at a team like Vegas. And who knows if Tryamkin (plays top pairing minutes in the KHL) or Woo develops into that role. If it's available to draft, then sure. Not sure we need to worry about it by next season.
  22. Tryamkin has played RD almost exclusively in his career. Bump him to the right, slot in Rathbone. Can never have too much depth, so we could add more dmen to the pipeline, but I don't mind that defense group in a couple of years.
  23. And I bring this up again. What did Rafferty do as a senior in college? Some players do take longer to develop or perhaps they don't, but I don't see a reason to not see if we can develop him further on an ELC and get something out of him. And besides, his role would be more along the lines of a bottom 6 guy that can maybe PK and put up 15 points? But we don't hear much beyond points, so hard to gauge him in that aspect, but surely the Canucks brass has more knowledge. Contract spots is the limiting factor, so we will see how many are off the books and if we have space to continue his development path.
  24. Do you disagree on my assessment or that we give him a contract? Just curious.
  25. And that's fine, but he's shortening his time that we can develop him. He just plays a game and then goes to Utica. Although I'm curious as to when he said that because I must've missed it. There's a possibility of him making the bottom 6, but he certainly is a work in progress. The question is do we want to continue investing in him or not. He's saying the right things like he wants to sign here cause we drafted him.
×
×
  • Create New...