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

EternalCanuckFan

Members
  • Posts

    2,090
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by EternalCanuckFan

  1. Totally spitballing here... but if the Canucks keep Miller and Horvat in the core with Pettersson, Hughes and Demko and they clear cap space this summer (e.g. Myers, Dickinson, maybe Poolman, maybe Pearson) and convert one or more of Boeser and Garland to improve positionally or to save cap space with value coming back, then I wonder whether they would have any stomach going after Filip Forsberg. Forsberg may still be re-signed by NSH and he's having a career year so he will be very expensive to sign, but IMHO, he would be quite the upgrade over Boeser (assuming Boeser is traded elsewhere). As far as trading Boeser is concerned, there have been proposals to move him to acquire the young RHD that the team has needed for awhile, but I'm wondering if there could be any interest between VAN and PHI regarding a Konecny-Boeser swap. They are basically the same age and at the exact same points of their career. Konecny is smaller but a much better skater, with a gritty game, and who is more of a playmaker than a sniper. The fact that PHI just acquired Tippett, also a RW, doesn't help the case, but I personally like Konecny's game. There's also the Horvat connection. In the above scenario, Garland might then be moved for the young RHD (e.g. Grans). There are a lot of moves that are contingent on one another, which is why this is just spitballing, but I think this would significantly improve the top 6/9 of the team quickly.
  2. Myrenberg is definitely one of the D prospects that I'm most intrigued about, particularly considering the fact that he's playing in the SHL as an 18 year old. Persson's interesting as well but as a 20-year old, there's likely less room for him to develop. The Canucks might not have any blue chippers but they do have some intriguing prospects. I wouldn't bet on any of them making it at this point, so if there are good NHL deals to acquire players who are much closer to being ready without creating all new roster problems elsewhere, then I'm still for it.
  3. Was Persson only planning to play in NA for 1-year? I can't remember. Hard to judge his season from numbers alone. Doesn't seem bad but doesn't seem outstanding albeit he would have been learning a different style of game this season.
  4. Given Demko's play, I would be totally down with the Canucks signing Martin to back him up next year. Martin could try UFA but despite his strong play in the 3 games he started as well as his solid AHL play, I still can't see that moving the needle sufficiently for a team to not only sign him to a more lucrative NHL contract than what the Canucks could offer, but also entice him with the chance of being a starter. Martin is 27-years old this year. While that's by not "old" by any means and while some goalies are late bloomers, this would be very late. When I think of a late bloomer, I think of a guy like Dwayne Roloson but in his case, he had steady NHL time for many years before elevating to starter level. Chris Driedger might be more of a comparable and while he had two solid years with FLA, he's been pretty underwhelming with SEA (who have him for 2 more years at $3.5M AAV). I think the Canucks are Martin's best shot. He gets at least another year to work with Ian Clark if he re-signs for one year, and if he can solidify his hold on the backup role, then that gives him big league money for one year and more importantly, it positions him better to look at the rest of the league the next year. It also gives the Canucks another year to evaluate Silovs and DiPietro.
  5. Curious if Keeper is eligible for the AHL playoffs since he has been injured. Hopefully he can get some reps in before the end of the season.
  6. I agree that Miller the player could still be an important piece for keeping this team competitive in the long term, with long meaning the 3-4+ years you have mentioned. I don't think anyone really wants the team to be a bottom feeder for the next 3-4 years. I'm personally still on the trade Miller wagon but that's mostly because I'm concerned about his next contract. This would be alleviated if management can somehow: move out contracts like Myers', Dickinson, Poolman this summer; maybe move Pearson (if only for cap space - he's at least been effective this year); address the question of QH's D partner; and find less expensive players for depth at forward and on D. There will obviously also be a significant decision to be made about Boeser which, IMHO, also directly impacts Miller and Horvat. I'm not against trading Garland, depending of course on the return, even if that's not where I would start in terms of deal making. Many interrelated parts. JR's comment about "unravelling" makes me wonder if that's a reference to the OEL deal. If Allvin and JR can somehow move OEL as well, then that could be momentous. OEL has been a better Dman this season than expected but, at his cap hit, if he can't produce more than he has this year for at least another 3-4 years, then the remaining years of his contract are going to be that much more difficult to stomach.
  7. I think a wrinkle is that Pettersson only has one more year at $7.35M after the first years of Horvat's and Miller's new contracts (assuming that it's Brock that's moved out). If Miller is resigned for $8.5M+, Petterson has one more year after that at $7.35M and Horvat is re-signed, then that's a lot of money committed to the 3 centers. I personally don't mind a team investing in C depth and allocating Brock's money to pay for the raises for Horvat and Miller does make some sense. Having said that, if Horvat comes in at $6.5M+, then that's more than a quarter of the cap tied to 3 forwards. The team is going to need to have a rotation of productive but cheap wingers to make this work. They're also going to be limited in their ability to fill out the D. I think it's possible that this could work but will this really provide the foundation needed for a perennial contender? Miller's play has been impressive but the fact that we have 1 1/2 seasons of him playing as a #1C does make me wonder. There's no question that Miller has been incredibly consistent this season and has only improved since last season, but it does give me pause about the team building around him as the #1C for such a long term. I assume that the long term expectation is that Pettersson will at least solidify himself as a top 2C on the team, if not the #1, but what kind of money is he going to expect in that case? What if Pettersson has a 100-point season in his final year? Are Pettersson's wrist issues concerning enough that management may not be considering him as solidly in the long term plans? The likelihood of the cap going up over the next couple years is helpful but it presumably would also mean that salary expectations may go up for Pettersson, especially if he performs. Like you said, glad I'm not making the decisions.
  8. Yup, not disagreeing. I guess I should have explicitly said that. I think the degree of reprehensibility of the joke does depend in part on whether Chris Rock knew of Jada's condition. The joke was in bad taste even without Jada's condition, but certainly was much more distasteful in light of it (again, irrespective of whether Chris Rock knew). A person could be bald for any number of reasons. Even if it was a man, if it was known that the man was going through cancer, then that would alter the perception of the joke significantly. If Chris Rock knew about the condition and made the joke anyway, then that's even worse. We are in agreement that even then, it still doesn't justify the assault. Just boo the guy and, if it really seems necessary, have words with him after.
  9. Chris Rock may have knowingly or unknowingly been insensitive to Jada with his joke about her baldness. Will Smith was wrong for assaulting Chris Rock by slapping him hard across the face in retaliation for the insenstive joke about Jada. Jada, for that matter, would likewise have been wrong for assaulting Chris Rock by slapping him across the face for that joke, although it would certainly have a far different perception if that had happened instead. Both conclusions can be true. Any slight from the joke could have and should have been dealt with differently. Just imagine if instead of slapping and then yelling at Chris Rock, Smith had instead reached out to Jada and then, perhaps still yelling, reminded Chris Rock that Jada has a condition (which I would assume would be fine since she publicly announced it). That's assuming they still wanted to deal with it publicly. Will Smith has achieved a lot in his career and finally received an Oscar which really should have been the only story about Will Smith coming out of 2022 Oscar night (for anyone who cares anyway). The wild swings from laughing at jokes about his marriage (one of the hosts made the joke), initially laughing at Rock's joke about Jada, slapping Rock very shortly after that, yelling at Rock from his seat, and then his speech and celebration of his Oscar win all contribute to an unfolding picture of a deeply unsettled man. It's akin to Jim Carey's comments about Will - there's something in him that led to that assault. The Oscar win was a huge moment for Will Smith and his family but will unfortunately be overshadowed by the story of his assault of Chris Rock.
  10. I think Podkolzin's development this season has been great. While it would obviously have been great to see Podkolzin come out on fire in terms of production, his baseline of play has been pretty good all season and that has only improved over time along with flashes of what he could offer as he builds confidence and maturity. Looking forward to seeing his play with Abbotsford in the playoffs and his development next season too.
  11. Sometimes it's a good thing and from what I've read about Dermott, it might be particularly good because while he is effective at making higher risk defensive plays by being aggressive on zone entries, when he makes a mistake it's glaringly obvious. If he wasn't noticeable, then hopefully that means he's at least being quietly effective in his own zone.
  12. I'm not going to get overly excited about Dermott but definitely rooting for him. Having another D who can skate the puck out and who has more offensive ability will help the line up. What I'm most curious about regarding the addition of Dermott is where this leaves Rathbone. Dermott can play both LD and RD, so that doesn't necessarily push out Rathbone, but it does keep another roster spot occupied. If Dermott is played on RD, then I guess Rathbone might replace Hunt on the roster next year. Would like to see Rathbone get playing time down the stretch. If the team really does try to move a guy like Myers (among others) this summer, then next year's D core could look very different.
  13. Certainly encouraging signs from Karlsson. Just going to enjoy seeing Karlsson play in NA and possibly make the jump to the NHL at some point. He still has a long way to go but considering how muted expectations were when he was acquired, his progression is great to see. Giving up Dahlen at the time wasn't great but, to be fair to the regime at the time, Dahlen also hadn't done enough to guarantee a spot on the Canucks' roster. He should have probably been given more opportunity, but we can't turn back the clock now. Dahlen was pretty productive from October to January but has been cold since February. I haven't looked at his deployment since February but he hasn't been generating many shots during this cold streak. His ice time has dropped fairly significantly as well. Curious if it's a factor of the long NHL regular season, higher physicality, etc. Maybe Dahlen will learn from this season and come back stronger next season.
  14. Dermott didn't fit the Leafs play style as well but isn't terrible, from what I recall. It'll be good to see if he can carve out a role with the Canucks. Bigger LHD who can play either side. Decent skater.
  15. I think the issue though is having a lot of term and $ tied to player well into his 30s and who is expected to keep occupying a key role. In the case of Pavelski, he signed his current $7M AAV contract in 2019/2020 (about 8.6% of the cap of $81.5M that year) so he was already 34/35. Pretty amazing - I imagine this is an outlier for a player of that age who, while being very good, had never quite been regarded as "elite". Pavelski's previous contract was $6M AAV which started in 2014/2015. This is considering essentially point per game production from 2013 to 2016 when he would have been 29 to 32. Cap in 2014/2015 (he would have been 29/30 yrs old) was $69M so his salary would have also started out at around 8.6% of the cap. Bearing in mind the roster construction at the time (i.e. Thornton, Couture, Marleau and Burns), there might have been a slight discount on his part. Still, that would amount to a cap hit of about $7.1M AAV based on next year's projected cap of around $82.5M. That contract ended in 2018/2019 when he would have been 34/35. Pavelski's actually an interesting comparable for Miller as he also didn't always play C and has basically also been an all situations guy. Miller at $7.1M AAV for 5-7 years after his current contract could work out well for the Canucks if he can have a Pavelski like trajectory.
  16. I will admit that seeing Pavelski just keep ticking does make me wonder if Miller can do the same thing. Pavelski has been a ridiculously consistent producer for so long. Only a couple of down years over his career.
  17. Nice to have some news. Will hopefully become a fan favorite in Abbotsford and maybe even Vancouver! Exciting days ahead for him and his family.
  18. At this point I would be surprised at a Miller trade at this year's TDL. If Miller is even traded, then I think it'll be anytime starting in the offseason and before the 2023 trade deadline and based entirely on how extension negotiations go. There might be genuine interest in extending in Vancouver on both sides but then there are the cap issues to consider. If Boeser is traded at this year's trade deadline, then I think we will probably see the Canucks go hard at re-signing Miller, perhaps at the higher end of the AAVs that have been speculated. I have been thinking about how Miller as a #1 or #2C has been such a new thing. When Miller was acquired, there wasn't even any certainty about whether he would be a good top-6 forward. Miller had already been reasonably productive in NYR (and then had a bit of a down year in Tampa) but never at the level he reached in his first year with the Canucks and certainly not at the level he's producing at now. I think this is one of the things that is so hard to discern about Miller's capacity to keep this level of production going in the future. The other issue, IMHO, is that if the Canucks do end up signing Miller to a long term contract at something like $8.5M AAV, then I think that has to be based on the projection that he is going to continue to be a top flight C. Up until last season when Pettersson was injured for the remainder of the season, Miller had not consistently played C. IIRC, he played C on special teams and took faceoffs for the Lotto Line, but he wasn't necessarily viewed as a full-time C. I think this has important implications because it will effect roster composition (e.g. it might induce a Horvat trade).
  19. I agree that these are the constraints. Until the Canucks can have a good sense of whether they can strike a reasonable extension deal with Horvat and Miller that would allow them both to fit with the team long term, I think the assumption has to be that money has to be subtracted elsewhere. The "phenomenon" of having 3 strong Cs is a pretty new one for this Canucks roster. It wasn't until last season with Pettersson out for so long that Miller began to be used basically full-time at C. Miller had still taken faceoffs for the Lotto Line, but Pettersson was the de facto C on that line. Obviously having Miller play so well at C this season has been a huge boon for the Canucks, and maybe it's something management wants to build around moving forward. I agree that running Miller, Pettersson and Horvat at C could be an amazing outcome for the Canucks, but not one they can likely afford without subtracting elsewhere. It wasn't that long ago that most projected line ups for the Canucks had Miller on default at Pettersson's wing and the discussion was more about how Horvat might have more offensive zone time with Dickinson taking on the heavier 3C responsibilities. Green rightfully gets a lot of grief for things done wrong but it was him and his coaching staff that started playing Miller at C and started keeping him at C this season. Clearly Green failed to push the right buttons to get the most of out the line-up, but the revelation of Miller as a top flight C is very new.
  20. If the Canucks could increase the number of successful college signings they complete, then at least the probability of at least one player making it is greater. Personally I am more interested in the Canucks successfully signing Faber's suggested Dmen in Scanlin and Livingstone, and maybe the KHL fellow who was rumored (although I imagine that is infinitely more difficult now). The other issue however is that these college guys don't need to become top-6 players. Obviously signing them still takes up a limited contract spot but it's not like the Canucks are spending a 1st Rd pick where the pressure to become a top-6 forward or a top-4 D is greater. Aston-Reese was very productive in college but has developed into a solid bottom-6 two-way forward even if his production is mostly underwhelming. Some of these guys can still develop into solid role players which every team needs too.
  21. If management sees Juolevi as an upgrade on Hunt, then maybe. That'll probably mean Rathbone will remain in the AHL unless another move is made.
  22. I agree. I'm starting to think that there might not be many changes at the TDL unless teams are willing to up the ante on their offers. The only ones I could see happening at this point are deals that could involve Boeser, Motte or one of the depth pieces, and that's mostly because of timing of those contracts. It may get a lot more active in the summer. I'm happy to be wrong about this, of course. Very curious to see if management has been able to forge a clear vision of where they want to go and how they want to get there.
  23. I'll admit that "consistency" is a difficult quality to define but I'll try. I'm not saying consistency means perfection but the team's difficulty with starting well has been well documented. That's one instance of lack of consistency. Every team has lulls but the best teams often seem to find a way to start most of their games very engaged. The best teams also often seem to consistently find a way to get engaged quickly when they may not start well or have a bad game. An example of this would be the Canucks during the peak years of the Sedins - even when they started poorly, they never seemed to be completely out of it. I would also consider teams that show up to compete every night but who may not win much to be consistent. In this situation, I would not consider consistency to be as much the problem as much as issues of skill, experience or other roster composition matters. Over the course of the whole season so far, I would point to Colorado, Tampa Bay and Florida being good examples of consistent teams even if they have a game every now and then that gets away from them. I would also consider Carolina and Minnesota consistent teams this season. The Canucks have certainly been better at some of these things under Boudreau. I don't think they're necessarily bottom of the league for consistency, but I think that's something the existing roster needs to either grow through or be addressed through roster changes. It's why I am very curious what management ultimately does and I think this is one of the reasons behind the reluctance to trade Miller. He has been a consistent and very productive competitor basically since arriving in Vancouver.
  24. As good of a run as the Canucks have been on since Boudreau took over, the team is still too terribly inconsistent to be a genuine contender. If they had not had the terrible start that they did then maybe they would be holding a playoff spot, but even then, this feels like a team that needs to be firing on all cylinders consistently for an extended period to even have a chance at being a contender (think St. Louis in 2019). As many have already observed, the team is competitive most nights primarily because of Demko, who is by far the team's most consistent player. As far as other top skaters are concerned, Miller has been consistent throughout the season. Hughes has been mostly consistent and Pettersson is finally starting to round into form with consistent performances of the type that he had become known for. The depth has been a mixed bag with the 4th line (Motte, Lammikko and Highmore) being the most consistent. The team can't win without the rest of the skaters showing up consistently. When the Canucks win like they did against the Flames and the Rangers, they show glimpses of what they can do when they are firing on all cylinders. They still have flaws in those games, but those games do make you think that maybe the team is closer than what critics might say. At the end of the day however, lack of consistency has been a more intangible flaw with the team that has been hard to address, but it's been going on for so long that it's fair to wonder if the personnel as a whole can ever find the consistency needed to truly excel. There has already been comments about the PK players having "bad habits" that will probably have to be addressed in the offseason which indicates to me that there may be more bad habits that need to be addressed. Whether players will be given a chance to resolve those bad habits themselves, or management will start moving guys out, remains to be seen.
  25. Could try a LOTR reference, The Two Towers. Somewhat fitting - one of the two towers is an evil one.
×
×
  • Create New...