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

theo5789

Members
  • Posts

    10,596
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by theo5789

  1. We will be hearing for years how we found a gem in that range! 8 pages of positive talk about a trade. Has Benning finally earned the full trust of the fanbase?
  2. Carolina certainly moved on from the younger players, but they were looking to shake things up because while 3 seasons ago, they looked to be trending in the right direction, they slipped again and became stagnant in the standings the next couple of seasons. Hamilton was showing to be a 50 point guy and while not great defensively, Hanifin was producing less and wasn't particularly great defensively either, so it looked like an immediate uptick there. Lindholm had been getting 40-45 point consistently over 4 seasons, but who knows if he would've taken it to another level with the Hurricanes, so he got replaced with a guy who just had a career year with 41 points while adding the physical aspect. Ferland despite having the concussion is still on pace to match his career year in less games, so it was a bit of a wash at the time of the trade. Then add in the contract demands from the two RFAs and maybe they weren't ready to invest that much in players who weren't quite taking them to the next level. But they did get a highly touted prospect in Fox, who has said he's looking to sign with a particular team but just wants to make the NHL ASAP, and he offsets some of the youth and potential. So I'm not say Carolina did the right thing or not, but at the time of the trade, I could see what they were trying to do and tried to make a hockey trade.
  3. Hindsight makes the deal not look great for Carolina at this point, but we have to look at it at the time of the trade. Carolina had new ownership and they were looking for a shakeup for a team that had not made the playoffs in 9 years. They had progressed 3 seasons ago, then dipped back down (in the standings) and became stagnant the year after, so hard to justify progress in the team. Lindholm and Hanifin may have been serviceable players, but they weren't pushing the team forward at that point and had big salary demands (whether in hopes of trying to get out or maybe they wanted to be paid to stay in Carolina) that may have been hard to justify at that point (again hindsight would show it was worth it at least in Lindholm's case). I felt both players should have been signed to bridge deals (I'm sure Lindholm likely feels the same at this point) as both guys coming to a new team had to prove their worth as they had big demands at the time for what they provided. With that said, Carolina felt they saw an opportunity to get a 50 point dman and get a guy with size and skill that can play with Aho and protect him if needed. Ferland had looked good to start the season, but has suffered a concussion this year. Adam Fox is a wildcard (he has said he doesn't have a plan to sign with a certain team, but rather wants to find a way to make the NHL ASAP, so Carolina just needs to make room for him), but definitely looking at the trade at this point, it looks favourable to Calgary, but it's only been half a season since the trade and a lot still needs to be played out. I wouldn't consider any of these players as "depth guys" when they were acquired. As for Carolina as a team at this point, they may be 3 points out of last right now, but they are also 3 points from jumping up 4 more spots as well in the league. They also have game(s) in hand amongst all teams below they (except St. Louis) and they are in the grouping with games in hand over a grouping of teams that are currently above them. For example, the Canucks are 5 points up, but have played 4 more games. So Carolina just needs to hit a nice streak and can make up a lot of ground. At the same time, they could very well stealth tank and get another top young player on an ELC contract.
  4. It was a joke on the reaction from when he was signed.
  5. But but Beagle is an overpaid 4th liner taking up a spot from a prospect...
  6. theo5789

    Sam Gagner | C/W

    At the time, I remember thinking Vanek was a bit of a surprise when he signed. I imagine that the original plan was to get Vanek signed, but perhaps Vanek wanted to see what other offers he could get as he likely wanted term. When he made himself available to us, we had already signed Gagner. So perhaps it was not only Boeser making the NHL, but also Vanek's late signing that took away some opportunity from Gagner. Gagner found more time with the Sedins after Vanek was traded, but then the Sedins retired and other players emerged like Pettersson in the top 6 and Motte in the bottom 6 along with the other more useful bottom 6 signings and Gagner simply didn't have a spot anymore (didn't really earn his keep either). So I would say Vanek also played a big part in not allowing him to be able to establish himself in his first year here.
  7. theo5789

    Sam Gagner | C/W

    People like to nitpick the few bad things and make it seem like that's the body of work Benning has done as if he's not allowed to make a couple of mistakes. People were criticizing the Virtanen pick to no end and now that he's demonstrating his worth, people have moved on to Juolevi. If/when Juolevi starts looking like a player in the NHL, I don't know what those will complain about, the Stukel pick? So even for FA signings, perhaps Gagner was a mistake, but he was sent down and away from the team so no harm no foul other than Aquilini's pocketbook. Benning isn't afraid to correct his errors. And there have been signings that have actually been good that are overlooked (eg Stecher, etc). I think some still haven't let go of the Vey trade either. Or the Hamhuis non-trade.
  8. Well isn't he like 150lbs? He probably got caught in a draft that added some lift
  9. Only two questionable picks in the first round in the last 6 years (McCann was a decent pick as well) and Juolevi still has a lot of potential IMO and Shinkaruk was moved and it's safe to say we got a decent player out of him and was a Gillis regime pick. I honestly don't how and why people still seem to harp on our GM over Juolevi with the track record he has given. Let's say Juolevi is a bust and some may feel he has to be to justify their long standing stance, Benning still has had an incredible 1st round resume and that's not even including the later rounds. We may not need more "lottery tickets" when we are making the ones we have count. This is why I feel we still need some vets to help with the development of the talent we are bringing in and not feeling the need to offload all expiring contracts (eg Edler).
  10. I stand corrected, but the point is that people are writing off Juolevi too early. Juolevi had 19 points in 38 games in Liiga (7 points in 11 games in the playoffs), then followed it up with 13 points in 18 games in the AHL, but the negative ones jump on the +/- because they're looking for something to complain about. And now some think his career is done with this injury.
  11. Hughes and Juolevi would be a lot of inexperience if both are coming in at the same time and Hutton while better this year is no sure thing to continue his progression into Edler like level. If somehow Hughes and Juolevi are ready to take over on the left side, I think I much rather have Edler stabilizing and look at moving Hutton while his value is high (getting top 4 mins and relatively young). So with all that said, IMO, I think we have a need for Edler beyond even just this season anyway especially as an option that would be detrimental cap/contract or asset-wise. So either he is exposed in the draft or he becomes a 35 year old UFA looking for a job? I think I would take the guaranteed pay if he can get it as it may be one of his last contracts and like I said, Seattle isn't far from Vancouver, so it won't be a huge move for him. I agree that he won't have to sign for peanuts unless he wants that NMC from us with the term that forces us to protect him in the expansion.
  12. If you were a resident Canuck fan on a Carolina Hurricanes forum, you might feel like you're more informed about the Canucks. Of course that doesn't make you the know-all of all things Canucks either, but your opinion is likely more well informed than discussing with the Carolina fans that may not have the same access that you do.
  13. His defense was always a work in progress (as it generally is for young dmen), but by the end of the Finnish season, he was getting big minutes and continued his fine play into their playoffs (7 points in 11 games). He was right up there in rookie scoring as a dman in the AHL prior to his injury. Who knows how he would've progressed with more time here. The injury is a setback, but his development was on the right track at the time. Guys like Chabot and Morrissey for example took a few years after being drafted to establish themselves. Just because he was drafted 5th instead of 12th doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me and I disagree that the complaints would disappear, so at the end of the day, it's not a race to see who gets to the NHL the fastest, but it's about developing a player to try achieve their potential and that requires patience. There have been plenty of amazing careers of sub 1000 NHL games. Some would argue we wouldn't have gotten EP if we had drafted Tkachuk to boost our team that little bit more, so silver linings.
  14. A couple of things that I don't quite agree with. I don't think Juolevi was anywhere near replacing Edler. If the expectation for Juolevi was to step in and play 20+ mins taking over PP and PK time, then that's just unreasonable expectations for the young man. So it would've taken something magical for them to feel Edler was expendable due to Juolevi even getting a few games at the NHL level. I would say Pouliot would be the odd man out (MDZ is as good as gone trade or not) if Juolevi took another step in development. If anything Hutton's improved play may raise questions about Edler, but I still think Edler will be here to stay simply because he will be the best and cheapest option for a heavy minute man that will fit in better with the timeline of our upcoming prospects. The writing may be on the wall for Pouliot regardless if/when Hughes arrives, but with MDZ likely gone, either Pouliot gets that extra spot or we explore giving someone like Sautner, Brisebois, etc a chance with the big club and maybe even Juolevi gets a look eventually. The other thing is the expansion will have no impact on Edler's contract unless he demands a NMC. If he does make that demand, then he will have to sign for peanuts. With the expansion being in Seattle, I don't think that's far enough for him to be concerned if he does get picked up. I agree that it's tricky to rebuild a defense and aside from getting a Karlsson, there likely isn't anyone available that will turn our defense around in UFA. The type of dmen we would like in a trade will cost us something and we finally are stocking the cupboards to potentially make something happen. I could see someone like Gaudette being very enticing, but at the same time he seems like a solid team guy that might become a core player. So with that said, I'm open to exploring on improving the goaltending (Bobrovsky?) to allow the young dmen have better insurance if/when they make mistakes until they are ready. This would accelerate the dmen grooming potentially in that we may able to have a couple young guys in the lineup instead of having one guy getting groomed at the NHL level.
  15. I agree with most of what you're saying except it being a bad pick. Juolevi has had a couple of injury issues since being drafted that no one could have predicted to happen. He's been progressing every year even with this. Sometimes making the NHL right away doesn't make you a better player. There wasn't significant interest here for McAvoy nor Keller at the time of the draft, but there was some for Sergachev and mostly Tkachuk. Sergachev is decent offensively, but is an adventure defensively, but like most young dmen, that could take time to harness so we will see. Tkachuk may have been an interesting add to our team, but we needed quality dmen and we still needed even up to our last draft which is why getting Hughes and Woo were such good picks for us, so Benning must've have viewed that Juolevi was the better player at the time as a potential two way defender that could log a lot of minutes in all game situations.
  16. This all sounds good except when does it end? Didn't Edmonton have like 8 top 10 picks including 4 1st overalls? It doesn't matter how many top 10 picks you have, but you need to have good scouting wherever you draft and almost more importantly, development is key. There are plenty of great players that can be found anywhere in the draft. So personally I think we are trending in a good direction and building a strong team foundation. The young guys are getting a taste of winning and want it more and more and that's a positive thing towards development. So with that said, we shouldn't be selling off picks just yet for a playoff push or anything, but I don't think we need to be tanking and continue to build on our success. If we can get a team changing player like Boeser at 23, I'm sure we can find another legit player in the 7-13 pick especially considering most of the top 10 are forwards and we could use another dman IMO. I should also add that if you move out Edler and Tanev, who takes on the actual hard defensive assignments and PK? You expect some rookies to come in and take over and think it'll be an upgrade as well? Hughes will boost the PP, but it's questionable how he will handle the rest of the game, so at least give him a couple of seasons to hone a defensive side to his game and having vets like Edler and Tanev will help shelter that which also adds value to the rebuild as much as getting more "lottery tickets" that may or may not pan out (even good picks could end up with unexpected injuries or what not). Asset management also consists of maintaining your current assets as well.
  17. And last night our team suffered another concussion. The NHL haven't been consistent with their suspension rulings (maybe more at stake as to how suspensions may affect a team?) so I wouldn't know how many potential suspendable plays were overlooked. But I do know concussions (amongst other injuries) are just as prominent at the NHL level. Baertschi's headshot was overlooked and now Stecher's headshot doesn't even warrant a hearing. Of course at the AHL level, there may be some less talented individuals trying to make a name for themselves. And even if there is factual evidence that the AHL is worse, at the end of the day Pettersson still didn't avoid getting a concussion, so the point is moot regardless.
  18. That is kind of why I asked because I can't seem to find the information, but it seems to be mentioned as fact. Pettersson made the NHL and didn't avoid getting a concussion, so I'm not sure what merit the comment about Pettersson potentially being in the AHL has.
  19. Is there actual information that backs this claim up? There have been plenty of bad hits and concussions just this season alone in the NHL.
  20. Maybe we should target Bobrovsky in the offseason and see if they will take a flyer on Markstrom for a decent return? Although I'm sure they will target Bobrovsky (if they can afford him). Markstrom wouldn't be a major upgrade, but I would say Markstrom hasn't been bad considering he's behind a team far more behind than where St. Louis and Philadelphia should be with the rest of their team's talent and he would fit in better cap-wise for them. With that said, hopefully there is a team looking for goaltending depth heading into the playoffs and will pay a bit to take on Nilsson at the TDL.
  21. I believe it's dependant on when the winning goal is scored. So if a goalie comes in when they're down 5-1 and still end up losing 5-4, the first goalie let in the winning goal and takes the loss. Or in the same situation if they end up losing 6-5, then the second goalie gets the loss because the game winner was let in by the second goalie. But if they come back from being down 5-1 and win 6-5, then the second goalie gets the win as the eventual winner is scored when the second goalie was in.
  22. Well this is what I hoping will happen in that the players brought in (Benning looks at good character) will be on the same page and manage deals that pay them well, while also thinking about the team in the long term. I agree that Gaudette won't be looking for a big payout yet, but I was just pointing out that he seems like a good character guy that cares about his team and is very loyal, so hopefully that translates into reasonable contracts in the near and long term future. I don't think Pettersson will bridge based on what he's proving this year and if he remains consistent or even improves in the next couple of years. He will be paid, but to what extent? I think there will be enough contracts up (and hopefully some draft picks coming in on cheap contracts) that Loui's contract won't have a major impact.
  23. I don't think RFAs have arbitration rights until their 3rd contract or something like that (don't know all the details), and that's why Nylander couldn't take it to arbitration (probably to his benefit). With that said, I wouldn't lowball our players and piss them off, but I wonder when our young guys have to extend if they will look at Bo's deal and try to help build a team. I look at Virtanen's bridge deal as another example of a great team friendly deal because if he doesn't perform, then it won't take much to qualify him. He will likely get a major raise anyway, but he banked on himself to improve (which he has). I have a feeling his next contract will still look like a pretty good bargain. Guys like Boeser and Gaudette who preach loyalty and commitment to their teams (and strong family values) just seem like guys that aren't going to cripple the team with bad contracts either. But then again, they did go the route of locking in their contracts earlier to burn a year to get to their next contract sooner. The question is will they take less money long term since we allowed for that to happen or are they eyeing the dollar signs earlier for a payout. We will see. I'm curious about Pettersson. We haven't had a player like him in quite some time. He also has 2 more years (+the remainder of this season) to see how he progresses. He's certainly going to be paid well at the rate he's going and if he can get bigger and stronger as well, look out. Hopefully we make the playoffs next year and have a more serious run the year after before Pettersson's ELC runs out and real questions will have to be ask about the long term future. If Hughes signs before the end of this season, his contract would run out at the same time as Pettersson as well. Another factor to consider is goal scoring has gone up league wide, so even though for example Boeser is a PPG guy currently, he's around 45th in the league. Does that mean he should be paid like one of the top players in the league (for those thinking he might get 9-10 million a season)? I think this will be an interesting topic for arbitrators (although, they usually just split the difference between the two negotiating parties anyway).
  24. I'm curious how the Bo contract will have an effect or not. Bo's deal is incredibly team friendly at this point. Does Benning negotiate contracts around this (no one should be getting more than our best player type thing) or does Benning have to negotiate based on the league? Boeser may be able to get up to 8 million a season or more comparatively to the league, but if I were to have it relative to Bo, then he's looking at maybe 6-6.5 million a season. This will have a huge impact towards building a winner with depth.
×
×
  • Create New...