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

MrCanuck94

Members
  • Posts

    1,197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MrCanuck94

  1. I see our PP's lining up as: PP1: Miller PP2: Ferland PP2.5 Ferland Boeser Horvat Pettersson Virtanen/Gaudette Pearson/Leivo Baertschi Boeser Baertschi Pettersson Hughes Myers Myers I felt one of the weaknesses in the PP last season was that Horvat was not as effective in front of the net as he was when he was the bumper. Miller and Ferland can potentially play net front effectively. For PP2, if a face off is required, we could have Bo take the draw then switch off. The PP would be run through Baertschi. The last option is if we decide to double shift our stars on PP2. We saw this happen with Pettersson late on in the season.
  2. That's also a fair point, it would be great if he had already made the team. I haven't agreed with the negative tracking POV because I feel his injuries held him back and made him look bad (seeing how bad Karlsson's lingering injuries made him look gave me this POV), and now that he's healthy, I'm hoping he finally gets back to form and makes the NHL lineup by December.
  3. Once again, it wasn't stupid, it was a risk. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Would you rather have Glass over Pettersson right now? Of course not, but our management team took a risk with Pettersson and it's paying major dividends. Also, no, this team shouldn't "have" (in a guaranteed manner) more superstars because none of their picks have been guaranteed superstar picks (top 2). The chance of drafting a NHL player, let alone superstar player drops significantly after the top 3. The fact that we were able to draft 3 superstar caliber players with the 5th, 7th and 23rd picks shows how great our scouting team has been. Virtanen and McCann are both NHL caliber players and Juolevi is tracking to be one this season. Was there better options in hindsight? Of course. But that doesn't mean our drafting has been bad at all. Every team has their hits and misses in every round.
  4. I get that everyone is split on what OJ will be, but knit-picking stats to prove a positive or negative bias doesn't mean anything. There's too many real life factors to be able to predict what OJ will be. Let's just let the kid develop and make his way to the NHL. Just like real life, everyone progresses at their own timeline. The only argument I would present to the negative bias side is that it cannot be argued that OJ still has a high ceiling, there's a reason he was drafted 5th overall. He didn't plateau, the team lost 3 100 point scorers. His Finland season wasn't up and down, it was down and he developed into one of their top d men come playoff time. I would argue that his progression hasn't stagnated, but that injuries have hindered his ability to perform at a 100% (I realize that is a form of being stagnant, but I'm speaking in terms of not naturally stagnating, rather he is getting better and will continue to as long as he's healthy). I also see him as becoming a #2-4 d man which isn't bad at all for a 5th overall (Yeah players around him have progressed well but speaking in terms of just focusing on the asset specifically). It wasn't a stupid pick, management rolled the dice and picked who they thought was the best d-man in the draft (OJ was consensus one of the best and ranked around the same area). In hindsight they shouldn't have picked by position, but they have learned and have gone BPA every draft since.
  5. Well that wasn't your original proposal, so no that trade wouldn't be good at all for us. As for the specific hypothetical of those top players, a team wouldn't give up one of those guys for that package. We can't lose the depth we've finally made. Not a good proposal for either side.
  6. The top 5 in the 2020 draft is full of projected elite players. Would you trade Pettersson for that package? Probably not. It could also be argued that it doesn't make sense from our side either because our team needs the depth. However, if Lafrenier, Byfield, Raymond or Holtz was offered for that package, it would be hard to say no.
  7. 3.5 x 4 is not bad at all, the Canucks got better today.
  8. I have a strong feeling the succession plan is to have Juolevi take over for when Tanev is traded and that will be done before December, whether that is during the summer or during that portion of the season. I say this because I think the Benn signing had a lot to do with this, where Benn will take over Tanev's spot on the right side and Juolevi will be given time to grow into the NHL game on the bottom pair.
  9. I said if he did, which is the basis of this thread. I agree he wouldn't. Your argument was you wouldn't take him based off monetary reasons, to which I disagreed, always take the best asset. Would I add to Boeser to get Marner at the moment? Nope, so I agree with you there.
  10. Why not just trade Boeser and run with 4 3rd line wingers then. Lol. If Marner ever gets offered for Boeser, you take that and run. Always take the best asset in any circumstance, figure the rest out later.
  11. Don't really agree with the lineup projection, when healthy, I see it more as: Miller - Pettersson - Boeser Pearson - Horvat - Baertschi Roussel - Gaudette/Sutter - Leivo Motte - Beagle - Virtanen Extras: Goldobin Edler - Myers Hughes - Tanev Benn - Stecher Extras: Fantenberg Markstrom Demko
  12. From the start of last season, Canucks lost Hutton (potentially), Gudbranson and Pouliot. Canucks added Myers, Benn and Hughes. Canucks added a legit top 6 forward. Canucks were on pace to make the playoffs if we weren't so injury riddled. These additions are huge. Benning has his flaws, some players may be overpaid, but he's risking it all and making a push towards becoming a winning team. Lets F****** Go
  13. 2nd in all time games played (longevity says a lot about a goalies ability), 3rd all time in wins and 11th in all time save % (which would be higher if you take out goalies that have played less than 500 games). Imagine his numbers if he actually had a good team for most of his career.
  14. Lose that disrespect about Luongo. McLean isn't even in the same league as Lu. Lu is a top 5 goalie of all time. His stats were amazing on the bad Florida teams and before we were a good team. I agree there are players up there that don't deserve it. Luongo deserves it as one of the best goaltenders of all time, the best goalie in Canucks history and very well could be the best goalie we ever have.
  15. I'm looking at it from a "make the best of a bad situation" perspective, I would hope it's not more than a 6 mill x 4 years deal. Does he deserve that much? Nah. Much rather spend money on Gardiner.
  16. Doubt Horvat gets their 4th overall alone. Perhaps Horvat + 10th for 4th overall, which doesn't make sense for us. Neither team does a trade around these centre pieces.
  17. I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure he's been in Vancouver the whole time while rehabbing the injury.
  18. https://thecanuckway.com/2019/05/27/vancouver-canucks-misunderstood-matter-olli-juolevi/ I think this is the article OP meant to post.
  19. Not saying I want to make these trades, but that is what it would probably take for the other team to do it.
  20. Needs more quality for the other team to even consider, value wise it doesn't seem terrible. Pettersson straight up, Boeser/Hughes +10, Horvat + 10 + B prospect, something along those lines probably gets you into the conversation I'd predict. Not that we'd do it of course.
  21. I love Boeser but you don't even think twice if Hughes or Kakko is offered for him. They are both projected to be and have a very good chance of being better than him. At the same time, we'd never get either in a one for one, would need an add, not sure how much.
  22. Jake Virtanen D+5 - 70 GP 15 G 10 A 25 P Josh Anderson D+5 - 78 GP 17 G 12 A 29 P Hopefully Jake can keep taking steps and improving like Josh did.
×
×
  • Create New...