3 reasons why the Canucks should put in a claim for David Schlemko

[TheRussianRocket.]

http://canucksarmy.com/2014/11/14/three-reasons-why-the-canucks-should-claim-david-schlemko

The Arizona Coyotes are in town to face the Vancouver Canucks tonight, and in order to make room permanent for one of their top young players in Brandon Gormley, they have placed defenseman David Schlemko on waivers.

We've been fans of acquiring Schlemko for a while now, and the fact that he's available for literally nothing but cap dollars is pretty enticing. Read past the jump for three reasons why the Canucks should make a waiver claim for David Schlemko.

1. HE'S A SOLID 5-ON-5 PLAYER

Over the past 3 seasons, Schlemko hasn't really seen full-time duty with the Phoenix Coyotes, playing in a career high 48 games last season, but also appeared in over 60% of Phoenix's games in the lockout shortened 2012-2013. He averaged about 14 minutes of even strength time on ice per game between 2011-12 and 2013-14, and also had the fourth highest points/60 rate of Coyotes defenders who appeared in 100 or more NHL games over that span at 0.75 pts/60 - a similar rate to Alex Edler and Yannick Weber.

Schlemko is generally a possession-neutral player, but he plays in a role that's generally filled by guys who don't push the play in the right direction, despite more favourable zone deployments. Guys who play a similar amount of games and ice time as Schlemko usually see around a 49% Corsi with 52% zone starts, and score at a rate of 0.56 pts/60. Schlemko does slightly better in terms of possession with slightly more defensive deployments, and he also hasn't sheltered by quality teammates.

In terms of breaking down his play into offense and defense, Schlemko has been a very high-event defender when he's on the ice. The Coyotes were able to generate shot attempts at a higher rate with only Keith Yandle on the ice, but Schlemko gives up quite a few shot attempts relative to his team too. His defense definitely leaves something to be desired, but his on-ice 58.1 CorsiFor/60 is a top-50 rate in the entire league.

2. HE'S FAMILIAR WITH WILLIE DESJARDINS

It's kind of obvious that Vancouver has gone out and targeted guys that new head coach Willie Desjardins is familiar with to bring into their organization. Most notably, both Linden Vey and Derek Dorsett played under Desjardins on some pretty good Medicine Hat Tiger teams, and currently find themselves on the Canucks. There are more Tigers connections in Utica too (Curtis Valk, Wacey Hamilton, and Hunter Shinkaruk, while Dustin Jeffrey played for Desjardins in Texas), and Luca Sbisa was once a top young D on a Lethbridge Hurricanes team that played in the same division as Desjardns' Tigers and went to the WHL finals.

As it turns out, Schlemko is also a former Tiger, playing for Desjardins from 2004-05 to 2006-07. In 06-07, Schlemko scored 58 points for Desjardins, and helped the Tigers to a WHL championship, where they beat the Vancouver Giants in overtime of the 7th game, before losing to the Giants in the Memorial Cup.

It appears, at least from the outside, that Desjardins likes guys he's familiar with. Having coached Schlemko for 3 years and guided his development, Desjardins would know that Schlemko's strengths appear to be at the offensive end of the rink, and be able to play him accordingly.

3. IT'S A ZERO RISK PICKUP

Schlemko is a number 5-7 defenseman, making fringe NHL'er money. He has one year left on his contract, so he can walk at the end of the year if he doesn't work out with the Canucks, and with a relatively small $1.1875 million cap hit and a $1.25 million actual salary, he also will earn less than half of what Luca Sbisa will make this year.

Right now Vancouver has two more contracts before they hit the 50 contract limit, but re-assigning Bo Horvat to the London Knights (as looks likely based on a relative lack of playing time and a healthy scratch tonight) will allow them to pick up another. This means that adding Schlemko should not restrict their ability to acquire other player assets further down the road, from either a cap perspective or a contract limit perspective.

Should the Canucks a) make a claim on Schlemko, and successfully acquire him, it's not going to fundamentally change their season. Still, picking up a guy like Schlemko when he's available is improving in the margins, and all improvement is good improvement. As it stands right now, the Edler-Tanev pairing is the only duo on Vancouver has been able to keep their heads above water in terms of puck possession, so even guys that consistently operate at a 50% Corsi will help. Schlemko's track record does indicate that he is that type of guy, which means he's likely a better player than Luca Sbisa, and Ryan Stanton is struggling mightily so far.

The Canucks need help everywhere they can get, and David Schlemko could help stabilize their bottom pairing, whoever is playing on it. And even if he doesn't, there's nothing lost from at least trying.

I'd be all in. Medicine Hat kid, familiar with Willie, solid depth dman, no price, additional strength incase of injuries. Better than handing out a pick at the deadline for a similar player imo.

[Warhippy]

I have to say that's oddly intriguing and there's that WD connection yet again which seemingly hasn't really failed us yet.

I'd be ok with this for sure, but what exactly is our contract cap looking at right now? And in regards to that wouldn't it mean us having to jettison some people in order to sign Subban to his ELC?

[apollo]

Pretty cool name and WD connection? Can't say no. It gives us more depth and if JB wants to do it, I'll be all for it!

[theminister]

If we don't claim him then is it a vote of No Confidence from WD that Schlemko isn't an NHL player in his eyes, or is it a fact of numbers from the GM?

[Tragoedia]

Edler Tanev

Hamhuis Sbisa

Bieksa Stanton

Weber

Schlemko

Sanguinetti

Corrado

I can't say I'm against depth, especially on our defense which gets decimated by injuries yearly, but it's tough to say if we actually have room. We probably would end up putting him back on waivers.

[S N Y P E R S 7]

3 reasons why we shouldn't:

1.) we don't need him
2.) we're winning right now - what would bringing in another D say to our current lineup? you're not good enough?

3.) we don't need him

what kind of trash is "the canucks need help everywhere they can get?"

hell no they don't.

what this would do would shake the lineup up - hey, if that means a higher draft pick because we fall in the standings as a result, I'm all for it. I'm all about the draft.

[DeNiro]

3 reasons why we shouldn't:

1.) we don't need him

2.) we're winning right now - what would bringing in another D say to our current lineup? you're not good enough?

3.) we don't need him

what kind of trash is "the canucks need help everywhere they can get?"

hell no they don't.

what this would do would shake the lineup up - hey, if that means a higher draft pick because we fall in the standings as a result, I'm all for it. I'm all about the draft.

Bringing in more depth on D would tell the team they're not good enough?

I don't see the logic in that. Schlemko would be a number 7 guy that wouldn't shake the lineup up at all. He would simply give us more options once the inevitable injuries to our D occurs.

And you think that would help us get a higher draft pick?

[MayRayDown]

[quote name="S N Y P E R S 7" post="12442150" timestamp="141601113haven't easons why we shouldn't:

1.) we don't need him

2.) we're winning right now - what would bringing in another D say to our current lineup? you're not good enough?

3.) we don't need him

what kind of trash is "the canucks need help everywhere they can get?"

hell no they don't.

what this would do would shake the lineup up - hey, if that means a higher draft pick because we fall in the standings as a result, I'm all for it. I'm all about the draft.

[Jägermeister]

Schlemko is a victim of Phoenix's organizational depth at D. They simply have to many good young defenceman that are ready to crack the lineup.

He would very easily be a bottom pair player on many teams in the league.

If he fell to us I would love to pick him up. Him and Weber as our 7/8 would be very solid and mean we'd be well equipped for when the injury bug eventually bites.

[Wilbur]

That would improve depth which I'm all for. But it would probably mean waiving Weber who could get claimed himself making it all kind of pointless. Unless the Canucks want to carry 8 D when everyone is healthy.

Bottom line, unless he's a clear improvement over Weber, I wouldn't bother. It's just tinkering for the sake of tinkering and why uproot someone like Weber's life just for the sake of tinkering.

[Keslerific]

Stanton Schlemko would be an awesome bottom D pairing.

[viking mama]

http://canucksarmy.com/2014/11/14/three-reasons-why-the-canucks-should-claim-david-schlemko

I'd be all in. Medicine Hat kid, familiar with Willie, solid depth dman, no price, additional strength incase of injuries. Better than handing out a pick at the deadline for a similar player imo.

If he IS familiar to Willie Desjardins,.. & they don't pick him up, can we all accept that for what it is, then?

[Kesler+Horvat]

I'd pick him up then waive Sestito

[oldnews]

I doubt he'll got that far on waivers. Edmonton or Buffalo will/should be all over him.

[THERETOOL]

I doubt he'll got that far on waivers. Edmonton or Buffalo will/should be all over him.

naaahh , it would help them too much .. they won't do it

[The Lock]

I'd just want him for the name. Schpiting all over the person in the seat in front of you as you shout out his name sounds like fun!

[Robongo]

Stanton Schlemko would be an awesome bottom D pairing.

Sbisa >> Schlemko. Pass

[Pears]

Hamhuis - Bieksa

Edler - Tanev

Sbisa/Stanton - Schlemko

That's a pretty nice top six and gives us a third right shot. Low-risk/high reward type move.

[Quoted]

Depth at D is never bad.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

Eventually, the Canucks will need 10 D men capable of taking a shift at the NHL level