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

Coconuts

Members
  • Posts

    30,141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by Coconuts

  1. Good for him, he's developed into a solid, reliable D who might be able to play on your bottom pairing. Solid depth guy.
  2. If Bear is in our top 4 at the beginning of next season and it's not because of injuries management will not have done enough. He's a 5 who can move up at times tops imo, not someone who should be getting regular minutes in your top 4. And that's not say he's played poorly, he's settled in since getting here and we could certainly do worse. Thing is we could, and should try to, do better too. Bottom pairing guys aren't tough to find in this league and the bottom two slots are generally where guys breaking into the league make their bones. Bear on a one year deal is fine but it's not as if others like Schenn, Burroughs, Woo, Juulsen, Dermott, or options available via UFA or trade couldn't also be potential fits in that 3RD spot. Particularly if they can do it cheaper. I don't think poorly of Bear, I just don't view him as being someone who isn't replaceable.
  3. I've said I'm not opposed to keeping him, I just think there are other options who provide different things. If they can ship out Myers and fill that spot with someone else, great. If they can't and Bear remains there as a stopgap going into next season? Yeah, that'd be disappointing. I'm not saying 5-6D don't have their place, I just don't think he's irreplaceable and I wouldn't be handing bottom pairing D a whole lot of term in general. Bottom pairing guys aren't difficult to find. Lot of teams have guys who can move up in a pinch, Bear isn't unique in that respect. Like I said in my first post in this thread, a one year deal would be fine but if we can upgrade on him I'd be looking to do so. Players will be replaced as we overhaul and upgrade our D, it's just how she goes. Teams are always looking to make their roster better, you do that in part by not getting too attached to particular players. It also depends on what our internal options look like. Bottom pairing guys are the most replaceable, bottom pairing spots are typically also where players breaking into the league do their time. What if we sign Livingstone and he doesn't look like a top 4 guy off the hop? What if they think Woo can make the jump sooner than later, if only as a more cost effective third pairing option. Can Juulsen potentially do it cheaper? Does Burroughs have more to give? What about Dermott? He can play both sides. Do they want a look at Johansson? Does someone like they become available via trade? Lot of options for replacing Bear, I wouldn't give him too much or too much term.
  4. It's a good point, who else is available and how we project our internal options will impact what happens with Bear
  5. I mean, considering their defense hasn't been solid forever that's not really a ringing endorsement. Same goes for his being anywhere near our top 4, we haven't had a really solid D core since the early 2010's. Maybe his stint in Carolina was an outlier, maybe it wasn't, at the end of the day he wasn't cracking the D core of one of the best defensive teams in the league. If our aim is to really build our defense we want better players than Bear in our top 4 imo. He's a 5 who can slot higher tops imo, or he should be. And at that point he's a bottom pairing RD, there are more cost effective options for bottom pairing RD, Schenn would be one of them. Myers has actually looked better of late, we've seen fewer of those chaos giraffe moments. If he's not traded I could very well see us just riding out that last season, at least til the deadline. Or maybe in it's entirety. I'm not opposed to retaining Bear but I don't think he's as important as some folks seem to. I wouldn't be giving him anything beyond a short term deal.
  6. And yet you're the one choosing to engage and make it personal. I see your posts all the time, sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't, and yet the only time you ever hear from me is when you choose to engage. There's a lot of takes you're never going to agree with but for the most part we're talking hockey around here, not morality, ethics, or something more substantial. You don't have to agree, but you don't have to engage either. Life is easier when you live and let live.
  7. A one year deal is fine, he's settled in well since getting here but I'm still not convinced he's a longer term option anyway. If we can upgrade on him as we overhaul our defense we should.
  8. There are much cheaper options one can bring in if they want that. Hell, prior to the deadline we had folks wanting to trade Boeser for Lucic. Just sign Lucic to a cheap deal, he's on record saying he'd like to play here someday anyway.
  9. Wouldn't be another CDC season without yet another repetitive post like this.
  10. I mean Sens are 6-3-1 in their last 10 Anaheim is somehow 4-4-2 Hopefully we lose both
  11. Wouldn't be a lost Canucks season without a winning stretch in garbage time
  12. I'd love to somehow pry Hague out of Vegas. Roy would be great too. Slot them into the lineup I listed and man. I'd try Hague on his off side and run something like.. Hughes- Hague OEL - Hronek Hague's job would be to primarily insulate Hughes defensively, I think he could do that on his off side. One could also bump OEL down to the third pairing and play Hague with Hronek, we'd still need a Hughes partner though. Slot Roy behind Pettersson and Bedard. Chef's kiss.
  13. If we're being serious though I'm with you on the Miller bit. This team's strength would likely continue to be it's offense even without Miller, moreso if Hronek can give Hughes some back up offensively from the back end. Circle back round to Pittsburgh and trade him for futures, rumour has it we wanted a young center in return for Miller, Bedard is one. Go into next season with something along the lines of the following. Kuzmenko - Pettersson - Beauvillier Mikheyev - Bedard - Boeser Either use said futures and shop for upgrades at D via UFA with some of the cap space moving Millers frees up or flip them to another team to either move OEL or bring in back up for Hughes, OEL, and Hronek. Work to find ourselves a solid two-way 3C.
  14. I think it's Tampa for me this year, I'm just so damn tired of seeing them have success. Plus, even if Toronto gets out of the first round they'll get stomped by Boston. I said Leafs, Oilers, and Lightning on the first page but I want to see Tampa lose more this time than the others. Lightning fans are spoiled, let them suffer a first round loss for once.
  15. I'd give the anti-tankers shit all summer long. The lower we finish the better the odds.
  16. Yeah, buying him out over the next three or four seasons just doesn't make sense. Those 4.4M years are killer.
  17. Is winter gone or are we back into the false-spring stage 

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. SixtyMinuteMan

      SixtyMinuteMan

      Winter carries over to April now

    3. Cup_Joneser

      Cup_Joneser

      I can only assumes this is a metaphor of the canucks play

    4. FaninMex

      FaninMex

      El Nino this year. 

  18. For sure. Teams were probably cheaper then though I'm assuming, even if you factors inflation and yadda yadda. Vegas was the first expansion team to cost and ownership group more than 100M. But hey, I'm just guessing on the inflation and currency bits. Giving the higher investment cost it makes sense potential ownership groups would want more favourable conditions than what existed even back in 2000. http://www.puckreport.com/2009/05/nhl-expansion.html
  19. Ehh, you give me too much credit. Usually, I try to, but not always. Lot of strong opinions around here and I think we all get heated about some of them.
  20. I think he gets quite a bit of credit honestly, I've seen multiple people argue exactly what you're arguing now. Particularly shortly after he was acquired. I understand your argument it's simply not how I'd do things, I'd rather him cook and give him the occasional call up when injuries arise.
  21. I try to, I don't always succeed, but a lot of us can get kinda heated around here. Lot of strong opinions floating around. More on topic though, new revenue streams are part of what I think hurts Quebec's chances of getting a team. Putting a team there likely doesn't have the revenue of a currently untapped market because hockey fans in Quebec likely already have an NHL team they follow imo. Maybe not the Habs, they were their biggest rivals if I'm not mistaken, but surely some of them have a team. Some of those Quebec dollars are probably already being spent. Putting a team in Quebec would likely attract some new fans, maybe younger generations, but probably not on the same scale as something like Houston or even Atlanta imo. Atlanta had a hard time clawing it's way up to being competitive, they only made the playoffs once throughout their entire existence and they were swept. I reckon the NHL's approach to going back to Atlanta would involve a favourable expansion draft akin to what Vegas and Seattle saw, potentially even moreso. Same likely goes for Houston. If the NHL expands, and I think it's probably inevitable, they'll want teams to be competitive sooner than later the way Vegas was and Seattle's showing to be, it helps solidify fan support but also the revenue stream itself.
  22. Severson is going, Severson was always going to be the guy who went. Them bringing in Marino signed his ticket out of Jersey. They're deep down the ride side with Hamilton, Severson, and Marino but that simply isn't sustainable from a cap perspective, someone was always going to have to go. Having a top RD prospect in Nemec only reinforces that. Jersey also demonstrated a willingness to let top prospects cook, Nemec's played a total of zero NHL games this season. He's got 18 points in 46 games with Utica as a rookie. There's a good chance that Hughes may cook too. He'll make it eventually, just might not be right away. It also depends on what Jersey does capwise, both Meier and Bratt are due for raises, Jersey has cap coming off the books though and could feasibly make it all work. Jersey's D is made up of Hamilton, Bahl, Marino, Graves, Smith, and one of Hughes and Nemec imo. I'd be a little surprised if they pushed both Hughes and Nemec into the roster the same season. Jersey looks to be in a really good place competitively, they're 7th in goals allowed and 10th on the PK, I don't see them looking to mess with their D too much. But hey, we're all spitballing around here. I reckon it'll look more like. Siegenthaler - Hamilton Graves - Marino Bahl - Hughes or Nemec That's a rather young third pairing but who knows, they wouldn't likely be playing big minutes like their fop four. Exactly, he's week to week right now isn't he? Hard to say how many games we'll actually have to assess Hronek as a Canuck before the offseason, it'll also be a Hronek returning from injury. Makes sense to wait. Moveable, yes, but I think Beauvillier is an easier piece to move. 6.65M is still a lot of cap to take on, guess we'll see. I think Myers is moveable I just don't think he'll leave bottom feeders off his NTC. If he's moved he'll likely want to go to a competitive team imo. Ain't getting any younger. I'm just not as sure about Hughes, particularly about his being into the top four off the hop. I think he could absolutely be a player but I'd be surprised if he didn't start in a third pairing role. Pettersson will absolutely be the largest contract we've handed out, and if his current contract was any indication I don't see us getting much of a discount. We didn't get one last time.
  23. I think he could be, I just think it's presumptuous to assume he will be He'd be better served stewing in Abbotsford next season imo, he's only 20 and there really shouldn't be any rush
  24. Luke Hughes is a future rookie who's yet to play a single NHL game, he's also 19, 6'2", and roughly 184 pounds. Graves is an established top 4D in his prime who's 6'5" and 220 pounds. I think it's presumptuous to assume Hughes would displace him and not slot in on the third pairing. If you look at Jersey's depth chart you'll also notice they're rather average sized up front, if not on the smaller end. This makes having a larger presence on the back end more important imo, Graves contributes to that. https://www.capfriendly.com/depth-charts/devils I'm of the opinion that some of Severson's pay will be allocated to Graves. Capfriendly also has Hughes listed as LD/RD so for all we know he may just slot in alongside Bahl. Gavrikov would be interesting. But yeah, both him and Graves will likely be very sought after if they make it to UFA and there's a good chance we miss on both. I'm not saying we will, but there are several other teams around the league who'll be looking to reshuffle their D as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see Raty get calls ups when injuries strike or something but yeah, I don't think he should be a regular. I think Beauvillier is replaceable, I think he's also a much easier asset to move. I'm not opposed to him staying but yeah, it seems likely he'd be a lot more easy to move than a guy like Garland or Boeser given he's a low risk, short-term contract option. I'll be verry surprised if his deal is closer to 10M than 11M but I wouldn't be opposed to it, certainly. Yeah, I mean, we're gonna sign him I just want to see a larger sample size before we back up a Brinks truck for him.
×
×
  • Create New...