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

J.I.A.H.N

Members
  • Posts

    11,007
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by J.I.A.H.N

  1. Hi Edgar You know, I think we are I think it goes without saying that it is the culmination of goals for and against that determine a players value In saying that, when talking about trading a player, it is important to take away disappointment and expectations out of the equations And only deal with the raw data...…..the bottom line is that Jake statistically fits the definition of a 3rd line player As a matter of fact, I believe he has some ceiling that has not been used So, when people talk about trading Jake, my question is who? Who is it that another team does not want, that is better than Jake, with more upside than Jake? Who will jump in and help us over the next 5 to 8 years any better than Jake? Because you are either getting a 2nd tier prospect or another 1st tier prospect that did not develop I see that as a wash, and question what would be the point? Now, if he could be packaged with someone else, to get a better player, well of course that is better But that is not the point I am making, nor what the poster is trying to point out..... Which is, a 15 goal scorer is not easy to find, especially one that has improved year to year..... Again, take out the emotion, expectations, and the name, and look at the player subjectively
  2. No, I think you have to fall back to the route point Which is, games are lost on goals for and against Therefore it is important to score and prevent goals when doing so, you have to take in account of zone starts, etc Virtanen had a minus 4, last year, and considering his line and zone starts, and his responsibilities, that is pretty good It is like Edler being minus 18, 2 years ago Not bad considering he played against the best players in the league The problem that the Canucks had/have is they in general have more goals scored against, than for In Jakes case, in the most simplistic form Jake and his line mates are put on the ice to not have goals scored against them I say in its most simplistic form...…..because of course you would prefer to have all your lines score more goals than their counterparts......but it is only the very best teams that have 3rd line players that are pluses (in general) So, it is important that the line score gaols and prevent them On a loosing team, I believe that a minus 4 and 15 goals for, is a decent stat Which is what Snapshot85 is getting at. IMO, I just think people expects more, which is probably right But that does not diminish what he does do/did on a regular basis sleepy/lack of effort/no drive...…..yup, and compared to most bottom teams 3rd liners he is good
  3. So would I, but he's in Anaheim and I do not want to see Jake that much when he grows up I think we should wait
  4. In saying that Jack Roslovic is a similar, but lesser player?
  5. Here is the question I want answered "IF" Benning is shopping Jake as has been publicised Then who are the comparable's………………...and no Poolparty is far from a Comparable So who around the league is 23 years old (give or take a year) Scored 15 goals in 70 games (which is 17 goals over 80) Can hit, and can play a big game and is an elite skater Keep in mind he is a 3rd line player and he will not garner a 1st or 2nd line player and we do not need on Also consider who might be available on Defense and where he might plug in, on the Canucks defense So, to me it comes down to, who is a young 3rd line player with similar ceiling, that plays 3rd line RW, on a similar contract that will provide 15 to 18 goals a season...…. and why would another team want to trade him straight across? To me, if Virtanen is moved it will be in a package deal...…….. Something along the lines of Virtanen and Baertschi for ?????????
  6. Tyler Myers OK...…….Everyone knew what we were getting...……...a top 4 defenseman......probably a 4 Plain and simple! So, lets not hear any bitching and complaining He will be hot and cold But basically he is equivalent to a 2 line player...…. Live with it!
  7. Hey! Don't you dare use stats, to prove your point!
  8. Well, I don't agree with your thought process.....but It still makes him a 2-3 by your standards Albeit a more a 3rd liner, but that is what he is, isn't he I would also point out that if he was treated like a 2nd line winger, he would get more offensive zone starts on average which would push up his totals.... I am not saying Jake is anything more than a 3rd liner winger, but his stats are not below average for that position
  9. So...…..Tryamkin played 13 games the first year 66 games the second does that only count as 1 year?
  10. Let's just put Jake's 2018 - 2019 Season in perspective Of ALL Right Wingers playing in the NHL last year Jake had the following stats...……….as per cap friendly 63rd over all in points 49th over all in goals 69th over all in points per game 89th over all in +/- 37th over all best in cost per point 31st over all best in cost per goal Of all Right Wingers in the league last year almost 2nd line offensive stats and 3rd line defensive stats Certainly, not something you throw out, or waive You can also keep in mind, that the Canucks were one of the lowest scoring teams in the league last year A couple more offensive Dmen and Jake reaps the benefits, IMO...and climbs further up the list 6 more goals and he is scoring at a 1st line RW rate
  11. I think as we progress out of the depths of the bottom dwellers, there will be many players dropping by the way side...……... Always someone who could be playing better...……….. Scapegoats? No! Replaceable players, yeah, but scapegoats, no, I don't think so
  12. Oh, there was a faction of CDC and especially over in HFBoards that argue Benning sold the farm Which IMO, was completely foolish
  13. Good point, good question But, yes...…….I do not see Eriksson leaving immediately As I put in my original, roster's for the start of the season Eriksson is there then, and after Roussel comes back, and after the TDL He is not useless, by any means Just not worth 6 M...……..as everyone knows In saying that.....I could see him gone But only if there is a need The question is …...what is the need?
  14. I am really torn on some of the scenario's, but I think it turns out this way. (Start of Season) Ferland Pettersson Boeser Edler Myers Markstrom Baertschi Horvat Miller Hughes Tanev Demko Pearson Sutter Eriksson Benn Stecher Leivo Beagle Virtanen Fantenberg Motte Goldobin Waive: Biega and Schaller When Rousell comes back wave Eriksson Barring injuries of course...……………….see Goldy is still there and its a 23 man roster
  15. NO, I have him still on the team the entire year, barring trade I think if you look at the larger picture (not saying you are not) Eriksson, is not in the Canucks plans trade him, waive him, buy him out, send him down, loan him to Europe, burry him in the back parking lot I don't care It is the 6 million that bugs me to death
  16. Maybe, you go to Eriksson and suggest he go to Europe and scout for us...…. Saves face and gets part of his money
  17. No, you miss understood on Motte My question was, If we move/waive Eriksson would Motte do just as good of a job because if the answer is yes I move out Eriksson, way before Goldobin why shake something that does have to be? I am lukewarm on Goldobin But as much as Eriksson can play...….I want him gone So, wave Eriksson if Motte can play his spot I guess it is a question of how much you value Tryamkin, IMO
  18. So, do people still think Boeser is over paid? I sure the hell don't!
  19. Oh, I know how far out my idea is but is there a better way to protect all things involved Goldobin isn't exposed Gaudette gets some time with big minutes Tree isn't Pssd I would not do anything until we trade someone Then Goldobin becomes more usable I think he would be gone on waivers Question>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could Motte play Eriksson's position Because if he can, and there is no drop off in results(play) That is who I move If not status quo
  20. I am a sceptic, and a little mistrusting I think that sometime one decision is based on another So, I know I will be in the minority here, but I think they keep Goldobin until Tryamkin is signed They are close, and I would imagine with Tryamkin's temperament, he would be some Pssed off If the Canucks waived or traded him now...... I can see Goldobin sticking around until then. ( they might actually be using Goldobin as a unofficial intermediary through this process) This is exactly Benning's MO, with Demko and McCann as the trigger was not pulled until after the Demko signed In Tryamkin's case the idea is don't give him any reasons not to come similar to Demko's don't give him any reason's not to sign Like I say......I guess it depends if you believe, there is actually someone a whole lot better to replace him......I don't think so So with that in mind, I keep Goldobin around, until I can't I mean, what does he get us in trade, anyways?
  21. You kind of remind me of that guy that got banded from here? Who was that again? Hmmmm?
×
×
  • Create New...