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. Good call. Thought I forgot someone. Saros is certainly the exception of that group.
  2. Not even sure if DiPietro has any trade value at this point, to be honest. He has played so few games over the past couple seasons and he has not played very well this year. Unfortunately for DiPietro, he's not a tall and lanky goalie which is essentially the prototype that most teams seem to favor nowadays. Casey DeSmith, Jonathan Bernier and Anton Khudobin are the only NHL goalies who is around the same size as DiPietro that I can think of and at this point, it seems like they're all relegated to backup. Khudobin obviously had the great run with Dallas in the Finals in 2020, but hasn't recaptured that form.
  3. This is great news. I'm not going to get my hopes too high, but the Canucks need prospects like Karlsson to make the jump over the Atlantic. Karlsson has real promise, even if he is not a blue chip prospect. Abbotsford has had a good first season and there are a lot of signs indicating that the team could have quite an infusion of talent next season too. I neither want to be overly fond or overly critical of Benning since the prospect pool isn't amazing and there are still significant questions about player development, but having also lived through the Gillis era (not to slag him either...) where there were even fewer prospects to have at least some excitement about, I think evaluating Benning's drafting and prospect evaluation (I'm aware Karlsson wasn't drafted by the Canucks) as fair or above average is reasonable. Hopefully Karlsson will have a really smooth transition to the AHL and get some NHL time next season.
  4. Going big in FA isn't a terrible idea when there are doubts about whether key guys on big contracts like Shea Weber will be able to play out the remainder of their contracts (and at a high level of play). Even with Weber on LTIR, MTL doesn't seem to have a vast abundance of cap space so it'll be interesting to see what moves they make if this is their long term plan.
  5. That's surprising considering they are in the thick of the playoff race and currently hold 5th. It's not like they are very lacking in cap space next year either. I guess Poile knows for sure Forsberg doesn't want to re-sign and his happier with a return than seeing how Forsberg can contribute to a run.
  6. I'm not saying I'm for trading Horvat and I'm not saying I'm pro signing Miller long term. I am not convinced that signing Miller long term is a good idea per the expectation that he will decline basically once his next contract starts. Might not happen, but could easily happen. All I'm saying is that based on what coaching and management has been saying, especially the hemming had hawing about Miller, makes me wonder if they may prefer to be trade Bo. Their talk about Miller and re-signing him might just be posturing, but it might also be real. If that's the case, then where does Bo fit in long term? 3rd line C? Possible, but then does making that choice move the needle enough to improve the roster? Does a Boeser trade fix most problems without needing to change up the depth at C if they keep all of Miller, Pettersson and Horvat? Again, I'm not for trading Bo. I think Bo has a skill set that could work well for the team as he moves through his prime and into his declining years. At the same time however, some of the comments from Boudreau last night seem to possibly be pointed at Bo and I'm not getting the sense that it was only from last night's game. These problems have been ongoing and if management is underwhelmed by Bo's performance and contributions to this roster, then I'm preparing myself for him to possibly me moved out. He might still have strong value for precisely the reasons you mentioned - still in his prime years, may be less expensive to sign after this contract, etc.
  7. Based on Boudreau's comments, I am really starting to wonder whether the new management team is leaning towards trading Bo instead of Miller. Despite being captain, Bo might need a fresh start. He's endured losing for a long time but maybe he's not the guy to lead the team out of that. There's the option of stripping him of the captaincy, but that's a very hard thing to do too. Bo strikes me as a much more serious guy than let's say Joe Thornton who didn't seem to be as affected by having the captaincy taken from him. Problem for the team is I don't think Bo will net as good of a return as Miller. I remember when past Canucks teams had players only meetings. This wasn't always a sign of discord with coaching or management. Sometimes it was just the players taking responsibility to figure it out together. Maybe they have given up on that at this point which does not bode well. Don't get me wrong - the team has done much better under Boudreau but we're still seeing the same problems crop up regularly and last night against the Ducks was a game where all the problems showed up at once.
  8. I agree. Didn't look dirty. Doesn't excuse lack of team response but not dirty. I'm not saying the team should have head hunted Deslauriers but they needed to up their physical game and failed to do that.
  9. As much as I feel for the players since this is sure to be an anxious situation, I agree with the general premise that whatever the situation is, the best way to go about their business is to show up and care. If the players are having trouble showing up because of the anxiety, then that is a test in itself, is it not? Despite the team's overall success under Boudreau, I personally don't think the current group of players hasn't done a convincing job of showing that they are contenders. I suppose it's good if they believe it in the locker room, but if the possibility of locker room changes to improve the team is affecting on ice performance, then that seems to be a problem. The team has been winning at a good clip with Boudreau but their flaws have still been evident. Over reliance on Demko, slow starts, insanely bad PK, inability to consistently play defense, insufficient depth, lack of size and snarl, etc. It's nice to see some positives like Petey starting to show signs of life, but you could still see many problems with the construction of the roster. Tonight's result was a game that exposed many of the problems at the same time (the refs may not have helped but the Canucks also didn't do themselves any favors). While no team is perfect, some of the best teams still find a way to compete even in their worst performances. The Canucks are still quite a ways from being there. I think it was Chris Faber who tweeted that the last time a JR team got blown out 7-2, there were a busy 2-weeks immediately after where many players were moved. The new management team has already had a few weeks to evaluate - I wonder if tonight just solidified some assessments.
  10. The Hockey Writers: Rangers' Disastrous 2018 Trade With Lightning Could Get Worse. https://thehockeywriters.com/rangers-lightning-2018-trade-lopsided/ Not sure if this has been posted already. Technically nothing new but I thought it was interesting. Might provide some insight into underlying reasons why the Rangers may not be keen to pay a very steep price for Miller. Not saying the reasoning holds up as I think it's based on a logical fallacy. The past decision is a sunk cost. Nothing they do now can change that if they really believe that the current JT Miller will help them move up a notch in competitiveness. Nonetheless I can understand the emotional/optical aspect of paying a steep price to reacquired Miller when the trade he was previously involved in already went very poorly for the Rangers.
  11. I'm not necessarily sure this reads as the Canucks signing Miller long term though that is certainly on the table. IMHO, Allvin is facing the following regarding Miller: Sign Miller to an extension next year. As per earlier posts, Zibanejad is probably a good comparable for what to expect. In this case, Miller will likely be the Canucks' #1C moving forward at 30-years old for another 7-8 years. Trade Miller now for a Toffoli-esque return which I think everyone would say is insufficient. We have no idea what other teams are actually offering, but that's the best indication of what a team was prepared to offer for a non-rental scoring forward in a similar age range. If that's the best return the Canucks are being offered, then I totally understand not trading Miller right now. It's not worth it. It'll gut the current roster and not provide much promise for the future. Trade Miller now for the hoped for return that is very favorable to the Canucks. Problem of course is that this is entirely fiction until a team makes an offer the Canucks can't refuse. Obviously in this situation it will ideally set up the Canucks well in the short and long term. Trade Miller some time at or before the 2023 trade deadline for a Toffoli-esque return. At that point, if the Canucks can't get an extension done with Miller, then this might not be bad. This might prolong the mediocrity of the team while not providing much near or long term help, but it also provides more time for evaluation of players and possibly other moves that do address near and long term needs. Trade Miller some time at or before the 2023 trade deadline at greater value than the Toffoli return. Same problem as #3. Obviously other factors include potential return for other players like Brock Boeser, Conor Garland, even Bo Horvat etc. An intriguing time for the Canucks but I imagine might be difficult on the players, professionalism notwithstanding.
  12. The Mika Zibanejad side-by-side comparison is intriguing. He's signed through to 2030 at which point he'll be 36/37 with an AAV of $8.5M. I think it's a fair point to use that as a talking point in trade talks given how similar their numbers have been extrapolated over the last few seasons. What's also of interest however is whether the Canucks are comfortable moving forward with a similar roster/cap structure as NYR if Miller is re-signed. Zibanejad had been my comparable as far as AAV is concerned when considering a Miller extension. Are they confident in moving forward on a 7/8 year extension at $8.5M AAV? Maybe Miller accepts less, but why would he when he could probably get that (or more) as a UFA? If Miller's re-signed then he's effectively our #1C for the foreseeable future. It's funny because Miller as #1C was not even close to a thing when he was acquired.
  13. I think NJD and fans have been waiting for Zacha to become that guy for a long time now. It looked like Zacha had finally got there last year but he's been quite underwhelming again this year. Between Debrusk and Zacha then I think there's no question that Zacha would be preferred, but I would still prefer Garland over both of them unless there are other significant pieces coming back. Garland strikes me as the kind of player that will be a successful play driver if you can insulate him with skill and size that compliments his skillset. Despite being small, Garland is one of the most tenacious and skilled forwards the Canucks have, and he's got good foot speed. The Canucks don't really have forwards that compliment Garland's style well. Ironically, Zacha might not be a bad option to play with Garland.
  14. Fair point regarding the ELCs for Myrenberg and Jurmo if they make the jump. Whatever the case is, if minutes in the AHL can be committed to them, maybe that will help them make the leap over the Atlantic. I agree with you regarding Tommernes and Cederholm. Peter Andersson is another although at one point at least I thought he might have a chance of coming up as a defensive D (IIRC Pedan was the guy who was given the chances to play in the NHL but wasn't good enough either). I'm thinking about Toni Utenen too although he doesn't have a ELC (and might never).
  15. I don't think people are necessarily sleeping on Myrenberg or Jurmo. Both hold promise and could be useful players for the Canucks in the future, but neither seem to be perceived to be as NHL ready as Schneider. Neither Myrenberg or Jurmo have played in North America. It would be more exciting if Jurmo and Myrenberg play with Abbotsford and start playing in a way that shows they might be too good for that league (like Rathbone is currently doing). Right now, I think both players are prospects that Canucks fans should look forward to, but there's still little to indicate that their current success will translate into something tangible with a NHL career. My guess is it might be at least 2-3 years before Jurmo or Myrenberg might start to make serious progress towards NHL careers, but even then they will need to go to the AHL which is by no means guaranteed. I have been following hockey long enough to see that some prospects who find success in one of the other international leagues end up staying there rather than try to make the jump to North America where they may be paid a lot less while learning the North American game and trying to push their way up. I, for one, am excited about Myrenberg and Jurmo but I am also very much interested in the Canucks acquiring other young prospects, especially players who might be closer to actually contributing to the NHL team. I seem to remember Allvin mentioning that the Canucks are in a position to sell international players on NHL roles and I wonder if this might be part of their thought process with bringing over international prospects like Myrenberg and Jurmo. I'm not saying that they will be guaranteed NHL roles, but maybe they'll get more lucrative AHL deals and receive more assurance that they will receive solid playing time in Abbotsford - I'm sure none of them want to come to North America and end up in the ECHL (not to diss that league, but it would be a step down from SweHL and Liiga). It's good that these guys are getting high level international pro experience but, IMHO, they need to eventually make the jump to North America before they will become more relevant.
  16. The Canucks do need LHD depth but if they remain committed to playing OEL and Hughes on the left and the other LHD does not play on his offside, then they don't need someone who will play less than 18-minutes a night. They need talented, cheap LHD depth. K'Andre Miller is that now but that's presumably not where an acquiring team would want him to top out at. For example, the Av's have Girard and Toews as their top-4 LHD. They also signed Ryan Murray to a rather inexpensive deal to round out their top-6 LHD. This is after trading Ryan Graves to NJD and letting Zadorov go (even if Zadorov does play on his off side). They obviously still have Byram also, but he is still on his ELC so they can afford to experiment with him. My guess is the Av's could easily trade Girard or Toews to make room for Byram (if warranted). The Canucks don't have that luxury. OEL is basically untradeable and Hughes is the cornerstone of the D core. I think this is why the emphasis is rightly on acquiring better RHD depth for the long term. Even if the Canucks are technically deeper at RHD right now, none of those guys are necessarily expected to be NHL regulars. Burroughs has been good but he's a good depth D for a great team, not a regular top-6 D. Woo is a bit of an exception but it's unclear how much he factors into the Canucks' future plans.
  17. I think this is the most likely situation with NYR and while I would love for the Canucks to acquire Schneider, Lundvist, Kravtsov and a 1st is not a bad deal. I would maybe like one more piece to be included, like Morgan Barron (projects as a bottom 6 C), but I think it would be extremely difficult to add another significant piece.
  18. I think the return is still quite high for Toffoli mainly considering that Toffoli, while productive, is not as productive as Miller nor is Toffoli as versatile a player as Miller. Heineman is a decent prospect playing at the highest pro level in Sweden. Didn't see the condition on the 1st earlier - don't see any language about what happens if it is a top-10 pick. Does it convert to a 2023 1st? At any rate, the return provides some indication about what the market floor might be for Miller right now. I'm not going to hold my breath for NYR giving up Lafreniere and Schneider in a packaged return (among other pieces) for Miller but it's less unreasonable to expect that Miller could net a very solid return that would be a much more superior to what Montreal obtained for Toffoli.
  19. High cost for Toffoli but given his contract status, if Toffoli can remain productive, then Flames could still trade him in the future. They might as well make a run now with this core, especially with Tkachuk being a RFA this summer and Gaudreau being a UFA. Mangiapane and Kylington are RFAs too and are likely to have relatively substantial raises.
  20. I think you're on the right track, but Miller is a much more effective C and a productive, play-driving C would presumably be more than a step above in value from Toffoli, even if Toffoli has one additional year of term on his current deal.
  21. Toffoli has an additional year remaining on his current deal so that probably adds value to his situation. The greatest value of the return to MTL is in the prospect and picks. Pitlick is an OK depth player and really just provides a warm body for MTL to have on their roster for the remainder of the season. Overall I agree with you though: Toffoli is about 1-year older than Miller, has generally been less productive than Miller, and is a much better winger than C (as compared to Miller) so even with one less year of term, this deal would seem to set the floor for a Miller deal at a rather high mark.
  22. He's also far more useful to Colorado in the playoffs than most players that they might want to acquire. Nichushkin would be an interesting FA target but as you said, his value is not only at an all time high as a trade target, he'll also likely have significant contract demands. Outside of some major moves that clears cap space for the Canucks, I can't see there being a good fit. Still interesting to consider though.
  23. The Canucks only save money this year. Zacha is a RFA with arbitration rights this summer. His new contract will be a raise from this current cap hit. He might well make closer to what Garland is making. I'm not against acquiring Zacha, including if the deal involves Garland, but I would not do it one-for-one. Last season was Zacha's best and he was on a 55+ point pace. Garland was on a 65+ point pace. They're both having less productive years but IMHO, Garland is the superior player even if there is an argument that Zacha may be a better fit.
×
×
  • Create New...