Angry Goose
-
Posts
13,454 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Angry Goose
-
-
2 minutes ago, NuckLuck19 said:
You cannot actually believe Ethan Bear is a top 4 dman on a good team.
Stabilizing for Hughes? What? Hughes should have been up for the Norris dude. He was stablizing Bear, jeeez.
if you actually have a semi decent eye test, you can see that Bear did a very good job at puck retrievals, defending the rush, sealing off the boards. Hughes doesnt play by himself.
good lord.
and youre missing the point. he doesnt have to be a full time top 4 player-he can slot in and play comfortably when needed. That’s utility
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, NuckLuck19 said:
You cannot actually believe Ethan Bear is a top 4 dman on a good team.
doesnt have to be a good team.
you think non playoff teams who are thin on the right side wouldn’t want/bet on Bear?
c’mon
-
5 minutes ago, NuckLuck19 said:
Who's offering a #6/7 on a good team a 2-3 year deal? If that's the case let him walk. He's not irreplacable.
People here are arguing a big RD like Myers can't be moved (post bonus) with one year left on his contract, where his cash pay is $1 mil and cap is $6 mil (even with retention), and is therefore a huge asset as a rental at the deadline, but also argue Bear who's injured for 1/2 the season is going to sign a 2-3 year deal with someone for 2.5 mil plus when he's a 6/7 dman?I don't get the logic here.
he has shown he can play in the top 4. Whether it was w Hughes or OEL he was a calm, stabilizing force on an atrocious team last year. Utility players like that have value.
Hes a young RH D. Has utility and possibly how other teams view him-has some upside.
He’s not a fringe NHLr. That’s just not a reasonable/fair evaluation of him.
Given he plays a position of need, he could get a 2-3 year deal even w his injury. Its not a huge/risky bet, but if it hits there would be real value there.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:
I get that these are generally good practices but the NHL collective bargaining agreement has so many terms and moving parts that no player or their agent should take anything like this personally. He's generally a bottom pairing / depth defenseman who is injured and going to miss part of the season and all kinds of players have never come back the same after injuries and surgeries including many Canucks...Trevor Linden, Darcy Rota, Barry Pederson.
I like Bear but I like Bear the way I liked Mike Weaver. He's not irreplaceable. I don't think the steps I suggested would qualify as bad faith. He's free to shop for a better deal while he's injured and he's welcome back to the team once he's not.
Your suggested course isn't unreasonable. But he's not that far from a league minimum kind of guy when his health and fitness aren't in question.
Despite the injury, I think a young, utility RH D, w good character will have value in the open market. More than league minimum I bet.
I wonder how negotiations have gone-it really depends on the numbers and factoring his injury/likely a down year.
If the Canucks/Bear want to make it work I think you try to negotiate a contract that works in good faith. Hardballing him now is not going to sit well with Bear imo-he seems like a high character person.
-
Just now, NuckLuck19 said:
Who's going to sign an injured #6/7? He would be silly not to take league min, because at least he gets paid. Right now, no one is paying him to sit out and go through rehab. Some money is better than no money imho.
another team could easily offer him a 2-3 year deal and have no problem putting him on LTIR this season to gain a hopefully healthy young RH D afterwards.
think it through
-
Just now, NuckLuck19 said:
And he goes contract less this season. It's a business, he's not some star they need to worry about.
sure, if you plan to walk away completely.
-
16 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:
I'd keep in touch with him over the summer and start of the year if he doesn't sign somewhere else. I'd offer him a lowball of sorts for the remainder of the year...a show me league minimum and a bit kind of Luke Schenn contract and if he performs well, then after that give him the two year contract he was maybe looking at this summer.
Might someone else want to take more of a chance on him if we don't qualify him and he becomes a UFA? Maybe but I wouldn't count on it.
the problem w low balling is that its not how you treat employees you want to keep.
If the Canucks dont qualify/dont offer him a contract its also the organizations way of saying we arnt invested in you and depending on how negotiations have gone, Bear could easily say he no longer wants to be a part of this org. either.
Which is why I thought you try to work w him on good faith. Otherwise be prepared to part ways.
-
13 minutes ago, NuckLuck19 said:
Only if Det is on his list of 6? teams he'll sign with. Personally, I like how PLD plays, don't like his attitude. He seems to believe he's better than he is. He's a 55-60 pt 2c who thinks he's a 90-100 pt 1c and wants to be paid as the latter. I wouldn't want that attitude on our team. Let someone else deal with the cap problem he creates.
Just saying Larkin and PLD as your top 2 Cs would look pretty good/solve their longterm C issue
-
21 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:
Don't make any offers. His market value is next to nothing now and nobody is going to sign him in the offseason. Once he has healed up, we can get him pro rated for half the year and he won't do anywhere near the cap damage. If any other team actually thinks he's worth more than that under the circumstances, let them have at it.
or you try to work w him in a 2 year deal?
I think everyone including Bear knows it will be a tough season for him next year.
1st year 2 million
2nd year 2.5 million
Canucks should be able to manage his cap hit LTIR wise and it I think its a good faith contract.
-
6 minutes ago, NuckLuck19 said:
Zadina is bordering on bust, and Valeno has one foot into the bust grave. Neither have shown top 6 ability,
Valeno was on the 4th line and is in the dog house. Detroit needs some star ability up front.
My bet is they take Moore or another center as they have Larkin locked up as their 1c for 8 years, they don't see Kaspar as a center, I am pretty sure he's listed as a winger, and they don't really have any top teir young centers in their system.
Valeno was supposed to be that 2c, and he's close to being out of the league. Rasmussen will be a solid 3c but doesn't have 2c upside. They have a major hole in their prospect pool (and lineup) at C. Their defense looks quite good so I suspect they focus there with their later pick and second round.
I do wonder if they reach for Honzek at 9 as apparently he can play C and they were scouting him heavily, with Yzerman actually going to see him.
watch them go out and nab PLD
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
22 minutes ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:Yeah, time to pipe down guys...
im here for the anger tho
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
22 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:
Sutter was also very skilled- he was a monster in shootouts
My big concern with Danielson is still his production in the WHL
Its a HUGE jump from the WHL to NHL, so if your numbers in your draft year are "decent", I have my doubts.
Danielson is 6'2 185lbs, and put up 1.14 points per game
Benson is 5'9 and 165lbs and put up 1.63 points per game
For context, Danielson's numbers are on par with Dragicevic who is a 6'2 defenseman the same age.
I really really don't want our management to be the ones trying to play it safe, and ending up with a 3C from their 1st round pick in a historically deep draft, when there's so many potential gamebreakers available.
Allvin needs to put on his big boy pants, do it the way Vegas did, step up to the roulette table, and start gambling. High risk, high return. Boom, bust. All or nothing. We either get a 1st line calibre player from our 1st round pick, or a guy who doesnt play at all.
PA drafted JL last year who is definitely more of a high ceiling/offensive talent type of player.
If you read through this thread/research what scouts have said, Danielson’s production has as much to do with the team he was on/his commitment to playing the right way. That’s context.
Personally I will always take solid play drivers any day of the week. Some scouts have stated there is untapped offensive upside to his game. If the Canucks scouting staff have a good read on him I would be happy adding him to the org. 2 way RH C’s are pretty valuable on a team.
But this is also ignoring what the Canuck’s list is and how the draft plays out too. Could be someone rated higher on the Canucks list drops to #11. Its a fascinating draft and I wish the Canucks could snag 2-3 players in the 1st round.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:
Danielsons rock bottom is a great 3rd line centre. I could see him making the lineup next year and be a solid 3rd line centre for the Canucks because we're so thin up the middle and he'll get a ton of ice time. He'll be a Tocchet favourite. Moore on the other hand, his rock bottom is 2nd line centre. He'd enter the league as a rookie as one of the fastest centres in the league. Like Danielson his numbers were also suppressed with his pp ice time nowhere near the pp time Smith, Perreault and Leonard got. Moore's even strength production was very impressive and he didn't get to play with anyone good until he got paired with Eiserman and his production went up pretty good. So Dvorsky, Moore, Danielson in that order. All 3 will be fine at 11.
I was thinking about who you go with btw Moore/Danielson. Both are similar yet very different if that makes any sense.
You saying Moore’s rock bottom is 2C is very interesting. Him and Reinbacher were my two top selects at #11 if avail (and if you bypass Benson).
And youve got Dvorsky rated even higher.
This draft is going to be bananas looking back on it.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Screw said:
Players always pump each other’s tires so…
It’s only my take. Sutter was destined to have a better career than what he eventually did too.
Sounds like an honest answer/mutual admiration to me though.
It has been stated that Danielson didnt really have the most offensive playing environment hence his numbers dont pop. And scouts have said he was so focused on playing the right way/2 way game that it may have further hindered his individual stats.
But of course he is a young kid you are trying to project. Question is whether you value his all around game/character (and position/RH) over more perhaps offensive impact players at #11.
Id say 3C is his floor and 2C his ceiling. RH C that can play all situations. He’s a good skater and has good hands. Similarly a lot of the same reasons I like Willander as well.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
35 minutes ago, Screw said:Danielson = Brendon Sutter 2.0
Conor Bedard:
"He (Danielson) was probably the guy that maybe gave me the hardest game," Bedard said. "He's so fast, so skilled. So if you turn it over or something, he's going to go down and do something. He's a great player."
Doesnt really sound like Sutter to me imo.
-
2
-
1
-
3
-
14 minutes ago, EddieVedder said:
I like OEL. He plays hard and wants to win but hes a #2 on most teams. The team needs a beast of a general like Petro, Ekblad, Burns or Hedman type on the backend.
Im not religious, but I am praying to god every night that the Bear injury does not lead to an OEL / Myers pairing again.
I think both (especially oel) will bounce back next season, but nuke that pairing from orbit please. It’s the only way to be sure.
-
JS is my big hope bet for next season. Everything I read/hear about this kid makes me want to see him succeed. Love his attitude. And with the restrictions lifted on access to Canucks coaches, I really hope he’s able to have an impressive offseason.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, MikeyD said:
Not even from just a skating standpoint but just how quickly you need to decide. There's a reason why players who were playmakers in junior don't end up playmakers at the NHL level.
It's why scanning is one of the biggest and first things you need to look for in a player. If they puck watch and they don't have that ability to scan plays ahead of time they're cooked. With that said, I don't believe Wood's scanning is poor, but I worry his reliance on advantages he does have will prevent him from continuing to upgrade this fundamental skill. You see a lot of big guys (guys like Slaf) who end up just eating pucks on the walls instead of being bumper guys because they have that advantage of not being forced to move the puck immediately. A big boy who can bump pucks to start transitions is elite and that isn't something I've noticed he's been able to do. Like you alluded to, one of his fundamentals is missing in this aspect.
Yeah. Reaction speed (processing/executing) is a seriously underrated trait. People take for granted what a skill it is.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, MikeyD said:
I think people severely underrate just how fast the NHL is as a league.
its a massive hurdle for players like Wood to overcome.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:
Goose is super angry today.
-
1
-
1
-
-
This would be excellent if it happened
-
1
-
-
Can we just just install air to ground missles at 4 way intersections? The amount of people who don’t understand/just do what they want at these intersections is ridiculous.
Blow them up. Problem solved.
-
3
-
-
On 5/31/2023 at 11:36 AM, Angry Goose said:
So if the Canucks pick at #11, my list for who might be available in order:
Benson
Reinbacher
Moore
Barlow
Wallinder
ASP
Benson is my boom/bust pick.
One of Reinbacher or Moore would be a coup at 11OA.
Barlow is a safe pick imo, and will be an excellent Tkachuk type of player.
Ive got Wallinder rated higher than ASP- crazy I know but my hunch is he will become a minute munching all situations type of player.
Interesting Canucks.
-
1
-
[Report] Ethan Bear out 6 months
in Canucks Talk
Posted
whatever you say smurf.
byeee