[[Discussion] PK Subban to Vancouver might make sense]

Would rather trade for Trouba at this point.

 

That said, I would still be open for Subban depending on the price... I'm assuming it would take Tanev (replacement RHD), a top prospect, a 1st round pick, and an additional mid-round pick.

 

In terms of said top prospect, it's too bad we traded Dahlen away so quickly...

 

 

[[Discussion] if Podkolzin is available at 10 do we take him]

Yes to Podkolzin at 10 every day of the week and twice on Sundays. High-end skill, non-stop motor, 200-ft game, and a sizeable frame to boot. Would be absolutely filthy playing alongside Pettersson and Boeser.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

I wonder if EDM and VAN would consider swapping the 8th and 10th overall picks along with Lucic and Eriksson, respectively. Recent events has Lucic being open to play for VAN in the near future and Eriksson not in agreement with coach Green. EDM would save on the 1 year of the contract (Lucic w/ 4 yrs @ $6M vs Eriksson w/ 3 yrs @ $6M) and VAN would jump up two spots, guaranteeing that one of the top-rated forwards are available.

 

Hughes/Kakko/Byram form the top 3.

 

That would mean that one of Dach/Turcotte/Boldy/Cozens/Podkolzin would be available for the Canucks as pick 8 should VAN and EDM swap picks as proposed.

[Eriksson's 'friction']

58 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

Yup. Chatting this with a bud today. For it, and I think fair.

 

With all this "friction" there's certainly grease to make the wheels turn for a trade of Eriksson and Lucic. Even Milan said a few days ago that playing in Vancouver was a possibility.

[Eriksson's 'friction']

Eriksson and the 10th overall pick to Edmonton for Lucic and the 8th overall pick.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

I woke up late and just missed the USA-RUS game. 

 

Has anyone been keeping tabs on Podkolzin throughout the tournament? How has he been and how was he against the US this game?

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

Prior to the U18s, I was really hoping the Canucks would be able to draft Matt Boldy. The way he is playing it seems like he's playing his way up the rankings and just outside our reach. You never know how things will go with teams picking on need or prioritizing centres and defenseman, though.

 

Cam Robinson of DobberProspects has this extended take on Matt Boldy. Definitely worth a read, and note the player comparison at the end, which I thought was interesting. 

 

 

https://dobberprospects.com/prospect-deep-dive-matthew-boldy/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

Scouting Report 

Shoots: Left

DOB: 04-05-01

Height: 6-2

Weight: 187lbs

 

Skating

Balance and precision are the names of the game when exploring the 18-year-old’s skating stride. He uses a wide stance to create a strong centre of gravity. This aids in providing power and balance to his stride which affords him strength when cutting into high traffic areas.

He offers sharp edges and clean cuts to compliment his overall speed. Here is an example of him using those edges to turn a difficult pass into a goal.

While Boldy doesn’t own elite speed, he’s regarded as a player with average acceleration and good top-end speed. His skating shouldn’t be a hindrance in his path towards the NHL, and as he continues to fill into his frame, the power generated by his base should only improve.

The acceleration has already witnessed improvement from 2017-18 to this season and there have even been some incremental in-season improvements as well. Despite not having blistering speed off of the mark, he uses his processing skills to get a quick jump on loose pucks and anticipate plays developing.

 

Shot 

For many, Boldy is considered a playmaker first and foremost. And that is justifiable. The way he can see the ice and distribute the puck is drool-worthy (more on that later), but his penchant for finding the back of the net is nearly as impressive.

There are two aspects of his shot which impress me the most. Firstly, is his ability to release the puck with very little pullback – thus offering less time for a netminder to become set and predict the target. This is a common-theme with deadly finishers. You don’t need the heaviest shot if you can get it off your blade with a quick twitch.

This makes his snap-shot one of his most lethal options, but he also boasts a wrister with a lot of zip and he has a capable one-timer as well. His ability to change the release point to fool netminders is a strength.

The second aspect is his accuracy. Unfortunately, The Program doesn’t provide us with micro stats and heat maps for their players, but having watched him dozens of times over the last two seasons, I can assure you that no angle is too sharp for him. He can pick a corner while on the goal line almost of accurately as he can while being left alone in the slot.

Heading into the World U18 Championships, Boldy has produced 30 goals on 177 shots for a 17 percent conversion rate. Last season with the U17 team, he converted on 18.5 percent of his shots when he scored 29 goals on 157 total shots.

His increase in shot rate – from 2.57 to 3.21 represents his willingness to use his shot more often and not simply defer to his teammates. I believe it has also been the result of his deployment. It should be noted that Boldy was the premier player on the U17 for much of the 2017-18 campaign as Hughes and Alex Turcottespent much of the season up with the U18s.

That role placed him alongside the sharpshooting, Caufield for nearly all their all-situations minutes. Boldy was able to create space to distribute to Caufield for the finish. This season, he’s played primarily on the second line with Turcotte or Trevor Zegras as his pivot while Caufield spent his season beside Hughes on the top line. That put Boldy in a position to be leaned on to be the finisher on the line for much of the campaign. He did not disappoint.

Of his 30 goals, 22 came at even-strength – while being completely removed from Jack Hughes. That number becomes even more impressive when separating his USHL vs NCAA game sheets. In 17 contests versus Division I opponents Boldy recorded nine goals on 59 shots.

Putting 3.47 shots on net per game as a 17-year-old against NCAA opposition is quality. Converting on 15.2 percent of those shots is damn impressive. For reference, his 0.52 goals-per-game versus Division I teams would’ve ended up as the fourth most of any freshman or sophomore this season – trailing only 21-year-olds, Ludwig Stenlund, and Alex Limoges, as well as 22-year-old, Johnny Walker (not the whiskey guy). Granted, it was a small sample size, but you get the picture.

 

Passing

As mentioned earlier, Boldy has long been known as a playmaking left-winger. He’s earned that billing by providing his teammates with buckets full of grade-A chances. There really is only one word to describe his passing game: silky.

Boldy has creativity in his blood and what appears to be eyes in the back of his head. His ability to hold onto the puck for just the right amount of time for lanes to open and mates to land into soft spots stands out. He blends that ability with extremely soft hands that allow him to thread the needle or saucer it over a stick or two.

He relies on his superior hockey IQ and knack for reading the play as much as he does on the physical action of distributing the puck. Those are all translatable skills and ones I place a great deal of value on when assessing a player.

 

Puck Skills

Boldy’s ability to maneuver in tight spaces is one of his most distinguished qualities. He owns very quick and soft hands that open up space for himself and can draw defenders in before creating plays. Often times a player who can dangle in a phone booth as he can, will lack the ability to carve around and explode through those holes. While Boldy continues to work on his explosiveness, his expert edge work operates hand-in-hand with his dynamic puck-skills. 

The puck skills and patience also lead to a ton of controlled zone entries. As we know, those lead to a higher percentage of quality chances. According to Mitch Brown’s tracking metrics, Boldy has operated at a 92 percent rate for attempted controlled entries and was in the 91st percentile for controlled entries per 60 minutes. 

 

Defensive Ability 

Once considered something of a liability in his own zone, Boldy has put many of those fears to rest this season. Through improved effort in the back portion of the rink and applying his intelligence away from the puck, the former Cape Cod Whaler is should now be considered a capable defensive player.

It’s unlikely he’ll ever be confused for Jere Lehtinen, but Boldy offers strong enough skills to provide the coaching staff little pause in rolling him out there with regularity and little fear of opposition opportunities.

 

Conclusion

As discussed at the beginning of this piece, predicting the order of things on draft day is an exercise in futility. But the tools and IQ that Boldy brings to the table screams productive top-six winger. He can act as a chameleon by tailoring his game to fit the needs of his line. This makes him invaluable to his coaching staff as they can use him to get a line going as a playmaker or finisher. 

Those traits will surely make him a target early this June. However, with the emphasis on pivots and blueliners these days, a talented winger like Boldy could find himself sitting there longer than his talent-level would indicate. If this is the case, a team in the 8-11 range will have themselves a steal of a deal

 

Comparison  

David Pastrnak.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

13 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Philip Broberg could be a divisive player in the rankings this year. He’s ranked as high as fifth overall in some rankings, while others — including ISS — see him ranked in the back half of the draft. Jeremy Davis from Canucks Army and JD Burke of Elite Prospects don’t even have him in the first round of his mid-season rankings.

 

That seems to be because Broberg has tantalizing physical attributes — a 6’3” frame and blazing speed — but seems to lack the hockey IQ to make best use of those attributes. He had a standout performance at the Hlinka Gretzky Cup, but produced just nine points in 41 games in the Allsvenskan.

 

One scout described Broberg as “A Swedish defenceman version of Jake Virtanen.” Still, if Broberg drops at the draft, then figures his game out, he could make a lot of teams look silly, because he has tremendous raw talent.

 

Cam Robinson from dobber prospects has him currently at #20.

https://dobberprospects.com/cam-robinsons-2019-nhl-draft-rankings-april-2019/

 

Holy, I said the same thing a few pages back... lol

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

IMO the only other defenseman considered at 10 should be Soderstrom. He is already playing against men in Sweden and has a high-level skillset, hockey IQ, and vision to go along with his skating. An all-situations puck moving defenseman, could be a great d-partner for Juolevi. 

 

Broberg reminds me of a defenseman version of Virtanen -- good in the defensive zone but when he gets the puck it's a full head steam up the ice to get into the offensive zone but nothing happening after that. He has a lot of tools to become a dynamic player but what about the toolbox? 

 

All that said, Benning should really go for a forward. Horvat needs a wingman and I don't think Virtanen is that guy. I really like the US forwards. I'm hoping that one of them is available at our pick. Any one of Turcotte, Zegras, or Boldy would be perfect. If Podkolzin falls to us he should be a no-brainer pick. 

[Olli Juolevi | #48 | D]

19 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, I’ve never bought into the butterfly effect argument that I was a good thing we didn’t draft Tkachuk (because we wouldn’t have finished low enough with him in the lineup to draft Petey).

 

EDIT: don’t necessarily agree that Tkachuk doesn’t drive play. Just think our lineup issues go deep enough that we’d still have lost plenty of games, even with him.

 

1 hour ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

That's simply not true. While it's impossible to say with 100% certainty what the given outcome would be in a different situation, all signs point to that not being the case. 

 

Pettersson had a monumental rookie year. Boeser and Horvat had a career years. Edler, Hutton and Markstrom all bounced back and played effective hockey. All that and we barely budged in the standings. 

 

Tkachuk had 48 points in his rookie year playing in the top-6 with Backlund and Frolik. It's unlikely he would've gotten those minutes with the Canucks given their situation at the time. We had just seen Virtanen and McCann graduate to the NHL early and fizzle out, so it's likely Benning would want to avoid that mistake again.

 

Further, the Canucks were not as good of a team as the Flames (almost 30 point difference), so even if Tkachuk did stick he likely wouldn't have put up 48 points. 

 

Finally, we were pretty much the only team eyeing Pettersson at the draft, he said so himself. The only team Benning was scared would take him was the Rangers after they traded up to 7th. If Tkachuk stuck and if he put up 48 points, it would move us down one spot and worst. However, that would also mean Arizona's pick placement would change (because we beat them a couple more times) and maybe they don't even trade the Rangers the pick because it's in the top 5. If they did make the trade, it would mean they were still behind us. So either way, we still walk out with Pettersson. 

 

In 2017-18,  there was only a 9 point difference between Tkachuk and Vanek. We wouldn't have signed Vanek at the time as Boeser and Tkachuk would be young wingers on the team, so that pretty much offsets that and we still end up with Hughes too. 

 

I guess there's the two extremes with regards to the butterfly effect of taking Tkachuk instead of Juolevi. On one end, there's the argument that we may have not ended up with Pettersson and Hughes, and on the other end of the spectrum there's the argument that we may have ended up with Pettersson and possibly Hughes too.

 

I wonder if in an alternate universe there exists a version of our world where Benning chose Tkachuk and still ended up with Pettersson and Hughes. And in that alternate universe Tkachuk would very likely hover around ~1P/GM playing alongside Pettersson and Boeser and we would sneak into the playoffs as one of the wirld card spots. We would still be down a Top-4D prospect though, but that would be solved this upcoming draft with Broberg, Soderstrom, Seider, York, and Harley in that second tier of defensemen and all likely to be picked in that 10-20 range. 

 

I guess maybe the argument should be, if we hold Pettersson and Hughes as constants in either scenario, are we a better team with the combination of Juolevi and Boldy/Zegras/Krebs or the combination of Tkachuk and Broberg/Soderstrom/Seider/York/Harley? Will the difference between Tkachuk and Boldy/Zegras/Krebs be greater than the difference between Juolevi and Broberg/Soderstrom/Seider/York/Harley? 

[Olli Juolevi | #48 | D]

57 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I get what you’re saying, but Tkatchuk doesn’t drive the play.  Johnny Hockey does that.  I say we still finish in the lottery.  Heck, maybe we win the third overall and still get Petey?  

I think we could still have both. 

Ahhh I see I see. That's totally possible. I guess we'll never know. 

[Olli Juolevi | #48 | D]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Why do we not get Petey?

I'm assuming that Pettersson would still be a top-10 pick in 2017. With Tkachuk in our lineup that year we would be in the playoff hunt until the end of the season, thus giving us a 10-15 pick in the draft. 

 

Moreover, the Rangers traded Stepan for the 7th overall pick and drafted Lias Andersson. Of the 7 players they drafted that year, 5 of them were in European leagues, 2 of which were which in the various Swedish leagues. They were heavily scouting Euro players and I'm sure they would have taken Pettersson with the 7th overall pick if we didn't with ours. 

[Olli Juolevi | #48 | D]

53 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I wonder where we'd be with his 174 points in 3 seasons

Our team would look a lot different with him, that's for sure. A top line of Tkachuk,  Horvat, and Virtanen would be hella entertaining to watch in the playoffs. We would also have Gaudette and Boeser on the second line.

 

We certainly wouldn't have Pettersson that 2017 draft, but we may have been that 10-15 position where Villardi, Necas, Brannstrom, Foote, and Liljegren were. Chances are Benning would have gone by positional need instead of BPA and as such we would have likely taken Liljegren. 

 

Then for the 2018 draft we would likely be in that fringe playoff position, I'm guessing 15-20. We would be in that tier just after Bouchard, Wahlstrom, Dobson, and Farabee, and would likely be choosing another defenseman for need. In hindsight, Smith at #17th overall looks like the best choice, but there was also Miller, Merkley, Sandin, and Lundkvist taken afterwards. One forward who dropped was Veleno, who we may have taken as well. 

 

For this year, I would assume we'd be another fringe playoff team and draft in that 15-20 range. There would be more leeway this upcoming draft for Benning, especially if he went Liljegren in 2017 and Smith in 2018. Names such as Lavoie, Seider, Kaliyev, York, and Harley come up. 

 

Hypotheticelly, we could have a lineup consisting of:

 

Tkachuk - Horvat - Virtanen

_______ - Gaudette - Boeser

 

Smith - Liljegren

_____ - Seider

 

Demko

 

 

Which looks a lot different from what we have now:

 

Boldy - Pettersson - Boeser

_______ - Horvat - Virtanen

_______ - Gaudette - ______

 

Hughes - ______

Juolevi - ______

 

Demko

 

IMO, as good as Tkachuk is currently and in a time vacuum with Smith looking like a solid pick, I would rather have Juolevi along with Pettersson and Hughes. Pettersson and Hughes have that electrifying ability -- something can happen at any time they're on the ice. 

 

Anyways, back to Juolevi, I still believe that he will be a minute-munching all-situations puck moving defenseman who can contribute and play key roles on the powerplay and penalty kill. Think of an Alex Edler type with similar size but less physicality and more mobility. Juolevi has always had years of positive development and played a significant role on every team and in every league that he's been -- OHL, Memorial Cup, WJC, Liiga and Liiga playoffs, and in his short time in the AHL. He just needs to work on getting stronger and faster, and that itself will come with time and training. 

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

4 hours ago, tas said:

given track record, philosophy and draft position, I bet benning goes to europe or ushl/college. at 10, the player you're likely to get is going to be in that range of not quite ready for the nhl, but good enough that you don't want to be restricted by the chl/ahl agreement. 

 

unless a bigger name drops, given the weight benning puts on goal scoring, I bet he goes with caufield. 

 

That's what I was thinking too. IIRC but I did some research on Matthew Boldy and he was at the same school (Dexter) as our very own Jack Rathbone.

 

I'm expecting one of Turcotte (if he falls), Boldy, Zegras, or Soderstrom as our pick. Possibly Caufield if Bennning and Brackett believe he can realistically reach his upside.

 

If Boldy is really comparable to Mark Stone, then a line of Boldy - Pettersson - Boeser would be dynamite.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

14 hours ago, Blömqvist said:

I agree. Go big or go home this draft. If we pick a defenseman it should only be Byram. Otherwise, pick BPA and highest ceiling -- we need players that will drive play, not complementary passengers.

 

 

3 hours ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

These prospects should be gone by the time the Canucks pick

 

1. Hughes

2. Kakko

3. Byram

4. Podkozin

5. Dach

6. Cozens

7. Turcotte

 

Would leave one of Zegras, Boldy, Krebs, Soderstrom Caufield for us even with worst-case scenario of picking 11/12. Soderstrom would be an excellent choice IMO.

 

 

I stand corrected. Imagine our defensive zone breakouts and our controlled zone exits with Hughes on one pair and Soderstrom on another. Both the eye test and analyticz crowds would have a collective orgasm everytime one of them rushes the puck up ice.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

1 hour ago, hammertime said:

But Boqvist is a head turner. He owns a rocket launcher and has speed to burn, slick passing etc. His ceiling is much higher than Sodastreams. Though his basement is also lower. Soderstrom seems more what you see is what you get solid big minute top 4 rhd. Personally nothing against Soderstrom he's a good prospect and a safe pick so I wouldn't be mad if JB picked him however if we're going for a RHD I want big nasty Sieder. He's a hulk who skates like the wind and throws fire and brimstone at the net. I'd like to see JB take a big swing with this pick and grab the best goal scorer Caufield, the fastest skater Newhook, or a tower of power on D Sieder. Sure I'd be happy with Boldy, Soderstrom, they just don't excite me in the same way. There will be middle pairing D and 2nd line forwards available in rounds 2-7. 

 

I'd like to see JB risk his first busting hunting for that franchise player. I feel like the times he went safe Virtanen and Juolevi have been base hits and the times he took a big swing Pettersson too skinny, Hughes too small for a D he knocked it out of the park. Keep swinging for the fences JB. 

 

I really liked JB's picks last year in Tyler Madden, Uttunen, and Artem Manukian  I felt they optimized this. Woo dropping was also golden.

I agree. Go big or go home this draft. If we pick a defenseman it should only be Byram. Otherwise, pick BPA and highest ceiling -- we need players that will drive play, not complementary passengers.

 

[Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW]

I would honestly look at trading Jake+ to Columbus for Josh Anderson. 

 

The potential is there for Jake to become that big, fast, physical forward who can score 20 goals/season, but IMO it won't be here. He's nowhere near the level of consistency in both his physical and offensive game as we need him to be. 

 

Might as well cut our losses and give him an opportunity to flourish elsewhere. 

 

Virtanen and Hutton to Columbus for Anderson?

 

Or Virtanen to Philadelphia for Myers?

[Luke Schenn | #2 | D]

15 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Offer Schenn a 2 year with an option to sign for 3 and/or be traded to a Cup Contender if we aren’t there yet.. I’d go 2m per.

Im really impressed by Schenn,  it’s the best hockey I’ve seen him play.. some times you gotta wait for the ripe ones.

 

I agree, he's shown more than enough to earn himself another contract with the Canucks. He brings much added truculence while playing a steady, simple, defensive game. The added connection to the Hughes family (spending time with Quinn's dad Jim Hughes during his time as the Director of Player Development with the Leafs) makes it a no-brainer to re-sign him. 

 

A 2 year $2M per season deal is more than fair. 

[[Rumor] Panarin Interested in Vancouver]

9 hours ago, SuitnTie said:

Look who’s in town 

 

We need Goldobin Tryamkin Bure over here ASAP to show him the Vancity highlife. 

[Olli Juolevi | #48 | D]

It would be foolish to trade Olli Juolevi considering his trade value as a former 6th overall pick has plummeted. The only case it makes sense is for another highly-touted, recently highly-drafted prospect that also has yet to reach their potential. 

 

Like Jesse Puljujarvi. Or Tyson Jost.

[2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC]

5 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

This is a post by pitseleh on Byram over on hfboards:

 

"It's a couple things. Keep in mind I am focused on the CHL.

The numbers for the top forwards from the CHL are unexceptional. Cozens, Dach and Krebs are producing more like forwards you would expect to see taken around 8-15 in a normal draft, not top-5 guys. The first two have attributes you can dream on, but from a production perspective they aren't there yet - they're similar (both in production and profile) to Jake Virtanen in that regard.

With Byram, it's that the overall collection of numbers are all very good. At even strength he is producing primary points at the same rate as guys like Ty Smith and Josh Brook despite being a year or two younger, despite not having much offensive support up front. We don't have Corsi, but he is by far leading his team in plus/minus, which I think is the best numeric evidence we have that he is driving play well. His team is one of the best in the WHL in goal differential with him as arguably their best player. He is on the young end age-wise for a draft eligible.

Post-Seth Jones, Evan Bouchard and Ryan Merkley are the only two defenders I see with clear production advantages, and each had their own specific issues that dropped their draft position below their production. Beyond that, there are a bunch of other comparables who have produced at a similar rate, but in each case I think Byram arguably has advantage (he's younger and plays with lower scoring players than Ekblad, Provorov, looks to be better defensively than Bean, better production with worse players than Juolevi, Sergachev and Chychrun, similar in profile to Noah Dobson but six months younger). Not to say he will be better, but he certainly stacks up well."

 

This poster said earlier in the thread that Byram's numbers push him closer to the Hughes/Kakko tier than the other players and this was his response when questioned on it.

 

Byram already seemed like a good bet to go top 5 based on the lack of defensemen available, but it seems to be turning into more and more of a sure thing. 

 

2 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Edmonton has leap-frogged the Canucks, pushing them to 6th.

 

 

1 hour ago, canucklehead80 said:

I’d be thrilled with him at 6. Would look like another steal in a few years. 

 

Byram is going to be a stud. If we are fortunate enough to draft him our defense will be set for the next decade with two potential #1Ds in Hughes and Byram and solid two-way top-4 guys in Juolevi and Woo. 

 

We would still need some extra firepower up front to support Pettersson, Boeser, and Horvat but thankfully the two Northeastern kids Gaudette and Madden look like gems. 

[Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW]

On 2/21/2019 at 7:18 PM, Alflives said:

Jake has way more natural skill than Wilson, but I don’t think he has the natural meanness that Wilson has.  

 

On 2/21/2019 at 7:27 PM, 40Dangles said:

Agree on both but he doesn't have to fight, just hit, which he can and does....he can be as impactful if he wants and should be more, as you say he has way more natural skill. He doesn't need to be bertuzzi to have a major impact on this team, hope he continues to progress when he comes back and next year. He needs to start 'imposing' his will on other teams....that's the next step and I think that is more confidence than anything

If Jake can be as much of a pest AND work as hard as Roussel; Roussel isn't the biggest person, or the fastest, or the most talented, but he shows up to play and makes a difference every night for us. If Jake can work at that level and with his natural skillset then he'll be a very valuable player for us.

[Luke Schenn | #2 | D]

22 minutes ago, 250Integra said:

I thought he looked fine and showed a lot of poise / stability. It may be the case where too much was expected out of him during his time with the other teams where he was relied on too heavily as a Top 4 pairing. He may be better suited with less minutes in a bottom 2 role (with PK time).

 

He's an NHL vet with over 700 games to his resume; he knows all the on-ice situations, how to react to those, and the safe simple plays to get him out of trouble. If the only knock on Schenn was his ability to keep up with the faster pace of today's NHL, then by all accounts if he puts in the work to improve his skating and passing I do see him extending his career by a few years. If he does just that, I do see him in that sheltered third pairing role with PK time as you said.

 

It's only been a 1 game sample size, but by all accounts Schenn wasn't as slow as advertised which looks good for him. 

[[Trade] Canucks trade Jonathan Dahlen to Sharks for Linus Karlsson]

I would've liked to move Dahlen in a package for a bigger fish that's in the age range of Horvat and that can immediately help us now and into the future. 

 

What could Dahlen and a 2nd rounder get us? Or, what about [Roster Player], Dahlen, and a 2019 2nd or 2020 1st?

[[Trade] Canucks trade Erik Gudbranson to Penguins for Tanner Pearson]

My semi-realistic scenario for the defense moving forward would be to bring Tryamkin back, sign Tyler Myers, and trade Tanev for immediate forward help.

 

Edler - Tryamkin

Hughes - Myers

Hutton - Stecher