Maniwaki Canuck
Members-
Posts
3,900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Maniwaki Canuck
-
Could happen from an asset management point of view also, since Grenier has to go through waivers whereas Kenins and Gaunce don't. Gives us time to see whether Grenier can cut it on the big club with the other two waiting in the wings if he can't. Good situation.
-
Good comparison. And like Markstrom, Schneider also had some bad starts at the NHL before that Calder Cup run, although not as many. But it did take Cory a few years of being a top AHL goalie before he was ready for the NHL. It certainly looks as though Markstrom has it down mentally and technically at this point.
-
Agreed, especially since Kenins can still go down without waivers. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 2 of them split time at 4LW with the big club next year. Grenier is great, but facing a bit more congested depth chart on RW.
-
Big game from Gaunce tonight. This guy isn't far off being ready for the big club.
-
Has some of the same defensive strengths by the look of it but better skating and a bit more offensive upside. If he can consolidate the physical, crease-clearing, lane blocking part of his game like Willie and then develop some first-pass and puck-moving ability to go with his shot, he could end up being a better player than Mitchell. Lots of ifs there, though.
-
Yeah, sure looks like he's soft and can't cut it in the playoffs.
-
Agree very much with your market analysis for goalies here, but I doubt this is how Benning is thinking. Regarding Markstrom: judging by his ability to bounce back from bad goals and games, he seems to have the mental game to be an NHL goalie, which some doubted when we acquired him. So that's a plus. But in terms of positioning, technique, etc., I'd still say he's got a way to go, and isn't on Lack's level yet. It looks like he's making progress and is learning to use his size instead of raw athleticism a lot more, according to the Melanson playbook. But considering the total breakdown and rebuild they did on his game, the results are looking good after a year, and it's a lot more plausible now that he can be a starter and maybe even a stud at the NHL level. So yeah, let's move Miller!
-
^^ Yeah, Shinkaruk's board-work really took a huge leap forward this spring and it improved his overall game noticeably. Baertschi could use some of that, but he does cut to the net, and to that extent isn't a "perimeter player". If these two push and learn from each other, we're going to be just fine on LW.
-
Lack was lights-out in the preseason. He did struggle at the beginning of the regular season, but that was partly because he went weeks between starts, got some tough assignments, and not much goal support. He is at least as good as Miller at this stage. If we get a decent offer, I'd still trade him, but the chances of that don't look good. If we can move Miller as a cap-dumb, that's plenty good enough.
-
I think we have to be ready for a scenario in which Markstrom is dealt for whatever we can get, probably not that much. The reason is that Miller is going to be hard to move, and Lack is just too good to get rid of. If Lack becomes our #1, Miller may expand his list of places he's willing to go, but it will still be too late to keep Markstrom. I don't like this scenario at all, but we could well be stuck with it. If Matthais walks in addition, it means that we get essentially nothing but retained cap for Luongo and that we would have been better off waiving him. I don't even want to think about that.
-
Certainly it complicates things for Jake. I suppose if they let all of Matthais, Dorsett and Richardson walk there could still be a place for him. Don't see that happening, though.
-
Yes, in a couple of years. But next year that might be a bit too much questionable defense for one line.
-
Long-term, of course he doesn't make sense as a 3rd line player. But to phase into our team next year, it may be the best, perhaps the only realistic scenario. Does he look ready to make the jump from the AHL to second-line duty now? I expect him to be deployed somewhat like Vey this year, minus the 4th line minutes. While I agree about the stupidity of trying to turn every player into a 2-way dynamo, even offense-first guys have to start somewhere. If he can step straight onto the 2nd line and thrive, I'd be thrilled, but I doubt management is betting the farm on that scenario.
-
This looks like it could be true. If so, being around our vets on the big club should help him deal with the emotional valleys that come with the game. But the youthful peaks can help the vets too. Kassian's effect on the twins (protection factor aside) is an example of this. It's all part of the ecology of a successful club, and why injecting youth into our lineup has been a good thing this year.
-
Going over the many pages of posts on the Calgary section of HF Boards, the concerns raised about his defense seemed to be about not always getting back or taking a direct line to his assignment when he's caught up ice, turning up-ice prematurely, cherry-picking, etc. Assuming that there is at least some validity to these concerns, I think being reunited with Green is a great first step in addressing them, given the previous relation they've had and how he's treating everyone else in Utica. Realistically, Baertschi has to be aiming for a 3rd line role on the Canucks, one that will have defensive responsibilities but offensive opportunities too. Since Baertschi played an offensive role for Green when they were in Portland, they can resume that part of their relationship, build his confidence back up, but also add on whatever system- and defensive-remedial coaching he needs.
-
Yeah, that's a definite plan given that we're going to have to thin our roster anyway: something like our first plus a decent roster player to move up 5-6 spots.
-
I don't see why not, subject to roster space.
-
Yeah, apparently Hartley didn't like him either. Not surprising given the Neanderthal mentality over there. I like the deal but don't underestimate the challenges with it. He has to be in our lineup next year, just like Vey was this year. But he looks to be even less suited to a bottom-6 role. Luckily our depth means that he'll be playing with some talent no matter where he slots in, but this one may take some patience.
-
Yeah, it doesn't quite line up with the eye-test in recent games, but is probably a legacy of his play in December, which wasn't at the same level as what we're seeing now.
-
Time to close this thread. Bo's not a prospect any more.
-
There's an interesting rant from Bur on player development here: http://blogs.theprovince.com/2014/11/21/canucks-hat-trick-want-candor-about-player-development-alex-burrows-explains-it-best/ I think it applies pretty well to Bo's situation and expect that he's going to stay up as 4C. When all our forwards are healthy, keeping him up does mean that we'll be sitting someone who deserves to play, but that's a good problem to have. When Sestito gets healthy, he probably gets waived, but I can live with that. Bottom line: if we're looking at being competitive with the California teams in the playoffs, Bo at 4C is easily our best option.
-
I think this is on the right track and the question is how to space out his 9 games so that he can be loaned out to the world junior squad without forcing the issue of whether he is definitively returned to junior for the rest of the year. Horvat may not be top 9 on the big club just yet, but he's a very strong 4C and is clearly solidifying our ability to win faceoffs. If we didn't have so much depth at forward, we'd be extatic to have him over someone like Ebbett in previous years. So I suspect the plan is to see if he can sustain his strong play until game 9 approaches, and then maybe put him in the press box until they can lend him to the wjc squad. If we don't miss him over that time, he ends up back in London but if we do, it's a chance to move some other forward(s) and make some room for him. The latter wouldn't surprise me at all since he's been as solid as anyone could have hoped so far.
-
Bulemic slouchers need not apply, eh?
-
Nothing wrong with McCann's start: the guy is looking way more dangerous offensively this year and has the numbers to back it up. The universe is unfolding as it should, and we are going to have some good problems finding room for all these guys in a few years.
-
I'm really happy for the good start he's had but hope he gets some time at centre soon. He could crack our bottom 6 this year if he's decent in the dot. Still, it's good to have two good LW in the minors in him and Shinkaruk, with all the RW depth we have right now. If Horvat is sent back to junior eventually there's a small chance we see him on the big club this year as a call-up in a bottom-6 role.