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

Santorelli (+2nd Rounder) versus Vey


JeremyCuddles

Recommended Posts

Vey is more likely to become more than what he currently is because what he currently is, is a pp specialist. Vey likely won't ever be as good of an all around forward as Santorelli.

You're judging a 23 year rookies career ceiling on the 18 games you've watched and 36 total played? Now you're just making me laugh. Needless to say I disagree completely. I think he will better Santorelli's career high point total (41) several times before he's 29. In the AHL he played top line, top PP unit, and top PK unit. The latter being an indication he's more than a PP specialist. He's a ROOKIE. Don't expect rookies to come into the NHL and play mistake free hockey. Eventually you have to insert rookies into the roster. If you have a decent team you can shelter their minutes to ease the transition and build confidence. Have you pegged Horvat as a career fourth liner who is good at faceoffs already? Because that's all we've really seen from him so far. lol

Had Santo been re-signed it would have been for one season. That's it. He was offered a one year deal and he turned it down. Boohoo. Do you see us as a cup contender right now? I'm guessing not. So is it better to have a 29 year old, who is still trying to prove he belongs in the NHL on the team, whose best season (and only decent one) was four years ago, or inserting some NHL youth into the roster? Eventually we do need to get younger.

Vey has surprised me in several areas so far. He's a much better skater than I expected, he's better along the boards than I expected, and protects the puck better than I expected. Although he's made some rookie mistakes he's also made it back a couple of time to break up odd man rushes when a d-man was caught. That would fall under speed and defensive skill. He's also made some great plays to set up quality scoring chances. Unfortunately several of those have been with fourth line players. He has a pretty decent shot and very good play making vision. So yes, I believe he'll be far more down the road than Santo can hope to be at this stage of his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second round pick was used on defenceman Roland Rckeown from Kingston.

Wish we used it to take him, especially with our lack of prospects on defence.

Mckeown and yes that's my worry as well. Watch him become a staple on the Kings D in four years time and CDC will go into meltdown mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mckeown and yes that's my worry as well. Watch him become a staple on the Kings D in four years time and CDC will go into meltdown mode.

I don't know, Vey's been pretty damn good. Works on his D game a little more and I'm pretty excited. His offence is pretty good too, although last game he tried to do too much in my opinion. Got in Hanks way a couple of times on the PP. I think Vey for a 2nd was a pretty sweet deal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're judging a 23 year rookies career ceiling on the 18 games you've watched and 36 total played? Now you're just making me laugh. Needless to say I disagree completely. I think he will better Santorelli's career high point total (41) several times before he's 29. In the AHL he played top line, top PP unit, and top PK unit. The latter being an indication he's more than a PP specialist. He's a ROOKIE. Don't expect rookies to come into the NHL and play mistake free hockey. Eventually you have to insert rookies into the roster. If you have a decent team you can shelter their minutes to ease the transition and build confidence. Have you pegged Horvat as a career fourth liner who is good at faceoffs already? Because that's all we've really seen from him so far. lol

Had Santo been re-signed it would have been for one season. That's it. He was offered a one year deal and he turned it down. Boohoo. Do you see us as a cup contender right now? I'm guessing not. So is it better to have a 29 year old, who is still trying to prove he belongs in the NHL on the team, whose best season (and only decent one) was four years ago, or inserting some NHL youth into the roster? Eventually we do need to get younger.

Vey has surprised me in several areas so far. He's a much better skater than I expected, he's better along the boards than I expected, and protects the puck better than I expected. Although he's made some rookie mistakes he's also made it back a couple of time to break up odd man rushes when a d-man was caught. That would fall under speed and defensive skill. He's also made some great plays to set up quality scoring chances. Unfortunately several of those have been with fourth line players. He has a pretty decent shot and very good play making vision. So yes, I believe he'll be far more down the road than Santo can hope to be at this stage of his career.

The last 2 years (I will admit its not a big sample size) Santorelli has been an excellent two-way forward, averaging about .5 points per game while matching up against tough competition. That is an incredibly valuable player. Lets say Vey becomes a 50 point player with average to below average defensive ability. Which player would you rather have? The answer here is Santorelli. Their difference in age is almost 6 years but I don't think Santorelli would fall off a cliff at the age of 32 or 33, he started his NHL career pretty late and does not have much mileage on him.

Retaining Santorelli which would not require any assets at all would have allowed Benning to either target a different piece in the Kesler trade than Bonino (maybe the 10th overall) or target a different piece with the 50th overall pick (either in trade or making a selection witht the pick).

Even if you think Vey will be the better player going forward for the next 4-5 years (I do not think this will be the case) its more beneficial to the Canucks to have the slightly worse player (worst case scenario) + an extra piece. It's not like we don't have much center depth coming up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite honestly... I don't see where Vey fits on our team going forward.

Henrik

Bonino

Horvat

Vey

That leaves Vey as the 4th line center which is not a role I see him suited for. He doesn't play the wing and will have to be sheltered whenever we play teams like the Ducks, Blues, Kings, and Sharks. Unless of course his defensive abilities improve drastically.

Then you take into account we will have McCann, Cassels and Gaunce pushing for spots. I'm not sure if it would be wise to put that many centers on the wing, and it seems like a bit of a waste of their abilities.

Vey just seems like an unnecessary acquisition. Yeah he's a young roster player and we need more of those, but the asset we gave up to get him could have been used to fill one of our more pressing needs (young puck moving D).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite honestly... I don't see where Vey fits on our team going forward.

Henrik

Bonino

Horvat

Vey

That leaves Vey as the 4th line center which is not a role I see him suited for. He doesn't play the wing and will have to be sheltered whenever we play teams like the Ducks, Blues, Kings, and Sharks. Unless of course his defensive abilities improve drastically.

Then you take into account we will have McCann, Cassels and Gaunce pushing for spots. I'm not sure if it would be wise to put that many centers on the wing, and it seems like a bit of a waste of their abilities.

Vey just seems like an unnecessary acquisition. Yeah he's a young roster player and we need more of those, but the asset we gave up to get him could have been used to fill one of our more pressing needs (young puck moving D).

There's a lot of assumptions in your post:

1. You're assuming Horvat sticks. It will be nice if he does and my prediction is he will, if not this year then next year, but it's still too early to tell.

2. You're assuming Vey has to be centre. He doesn't. He's even played games on the wing with us this season already.

3. Yes, we have other prospects pushing to spots, but so does every other team. If someone beats out Vey for a spot, then great, but it's a matter of "may the best man win". None of these prospects are going to get a spot handed to them on a silver platter.

4. You assume we could get a defenseman for that pick in a market where defensemen are hard to come by.

All in all, I wouldn't stress over it so much. He's doing well for a rookie, much better than many of our other rookies in recent history has done. If he turns out to not be the right fit it will show itself over time, but he's learning. Do not forget that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite honestly... I don't see where Vey fits on our team going forward.

Henrik

Bonino

Horvat

Vey

That leaves Vey as the 4th line center which is not a role I see him suited for. He doesn't play the wing and will have to be sheltered whenever we play teams like the Ducks, Blues, Kings, and Sharks. Unless of course his defensive abilities improve drastically.

Then you take into account we will have McCann, Cassels and Gaunce pushing for spots. I'm not sure if it would be wise to put that many centers on the wing, and it seems like a bit of a waste of their abilities.

Vey just seems like an unnecessary acquisition. Yeah he's a young roster player and we need more of those, but the asset we gave up to get him could have been used to fill one of our more pressing needs (young puck moving D).

You certainly haven't been paying attention this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last 2 years (I will admit its not a big sample size) Santorelli has been an excellent two-way forward, averaging about .5 points per game while matching up against tough competition. That is an incredibly valuable player. Lets say Vey becomes a 50 point player with average to below average defensive ability. Which player would you rather have? The answer here is Santorelli. Their difference in age is almost 6 years but I don't think Santorelli would fall off a cliff at the age of 32 or 33, he started his NHL career pretty late and does not have much mileage on him.

Retaining Santorelli which would not require any assets at all would have allowed Benning to either target a different piece in the Kesler trade than Bonino (maybe the 10th overall) or target a different piece with the 50th overall pick (either in trade or making a selection witht the pick).

Even if you think Vey will be the better player going forward for the next 4-5 years (I do not think this will be the case) its more beneficial to the Canucks to have the slightly worse player (worst case scenario) + an extra piece. It's not like we don't have much center depth coming up.

What makes you believe Vey will have a career with below average defensive play? Even in the AHL they don't tend to put forwards with poor defensive skills on the top pk unit. You've upset Santo wasn't re-signed and have taken such a negative view of Vey you just can't see the positives he brings.

Santorelli doesn't exactly have a cliff to fall off. He's never made it to the top of the hill.

The problem with your "extra piece" is it would have been three to four years away from NHL ready and then another couple of years in the NHL to get where you want him and that's assuming he beat the draft odds and makes the NHL at all. Whereas Vey is NHL ready now and saves several of those years of development. Just as several of the others you've mentioned as "coming up" are years away from just making the the team. I have serious doubts about Horvat sticking for the season. Trading for Vey accelerated the move to get younger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is what are the plans for Vey in 2-3 years once prospects like Jensen, Gaunce, Horvat, Shinkurak, McCann, etc will be competing for NHL jobs. Having a guy like Santorelli for 2-3 years would make the transition from the old guards to the next generation easier and less costly.

Vey still has a higher ceiling than Santo due to his age, but in terms of versatility, the winner is Santorelli. He can play all positions and even defense if need be, on the PP and PK, plus his compete level reminds me of Burrows when he first made it to the NHL.

Linden Vey may prove to be valuable to the Canucks, but keeping a guy without giving up any assets who is equal to or even better than Vey now is just more economical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah Vey's been alright for a rookie. Just needs to work on his d-zone coverage and playing with more intensity consistently. He needs to be way better in the face off dot though, if he is going to be third line center going forward.

A little bulk for added strength say another 5 pounds would really help him without sacrificing his speed winning puck battles and in the face off circle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vey became the most NHL ready prospect we had when we picked him up.

There is a lot of good things with Vey and some bad that I have noticed.

He is a much better skater than most people predicted. He isn't afraid to go into the hard areas and to engage in puck battles. He is good at holding on to the puck and making plays through traffic. He is smart and has good vision and a decent shot with a quick release.

But he has faults. He is not good enough defensively yet, particularly at getting the puck out of the zone. Faceoffs are an issue especially if he wants to play down the middle.

He needs to get a bit stronger. By no means I am saying he is as weak as frack, what I mean is that it will help him. I find even though he isn't afraid to engage in puck battles and going to the hard areas I find he gets checked easily at times. It will also help out on the faceoffs a bit as well. consistency is an issue as it is with most young players.

Nonetheless we have to remember Vey is a rookie and a rookie that is 6th in rookie scoring. Santorelli maybe a better all around player than this rookie right now, but down the road Vey could become much greater than Santo and a 2nd.

I honestly think Vey has top 6 potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is what are the plans for Vey in 2-3 years once prospects like Jensen, Gaunce, Horvat, Shinkurak, McCann, etc will be competing for NHL jobs. Having a guy like Santorelli for 2-3 years would make the transition from the old guards to the next generation easier and less costly.

Vey still has a higher ceiling than Santo due to his age, but in terms of versatility, the winner is Santorelli. He can play all positions and even defense if need be, on the PP and PK, plus his compete level reminds me of Burrows when he first made it to the NHL.

Linden Vey may prove to be valuable to the Canucks, but keeping a guy without giving up any assets who is equal to or even better than Vey now is just more economical.

We have no shortage of PK'ers:

Burrows, Higgins, Hansen, Bonino, Matthias, Richardson and Dorsett all play the PK. The Sedins are also very capable should the need arise. Santo has less PK time per game this season than the Sedins. What does that tell you? Vey has played center, wing and point on the pp this season. He was part of the top PK unit in the AHL last year (something you seem to be ignoring) but with our current PK depth is there a need to put a rookie out there? Not at this point. So where's the need for a 29 year old who hasn't managed to really establish himself in the NHL? Santo was a pleasant surprise last year but certainly not essential to the team.

Frankly I'd rather the young guy that could be something rather than the aging tweener we already have plenty of. Vey gives us a jump of several years development on using that 2nd rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot of assumptions in your post:

1. You're assuming Horvat sticks. It will be nice if he does and my prediction is he will, if not this year then next year, but it's still too early to tell.

2. You're assuming Vey has to be centre. He doesn't. He's even played games on the wing with us this season already.

3. Yes, we have other prospects pushing to spots, but so does every other team. If someone beats out Vey for a spot, then great, but it's a matter of "may the best man win". None of these prospects are going to get a spot handed to them on a silver platter.

4. You assume we could get a defenseman for that pick in a market where defensemen are hard to come by.

All in all, I wouldn't stress over it so much. He's doing well for a rookie, much better than many of our other rookies in recent history has done. If he turns out to not be the right fit it will show itself over time, but he's learning. Do not forget that.

I'm not talking about this year. I'm talking about going forward, the next few years.

You certainly haven't been paying attention this season.

Vey has looked pretty bad at wing other than last night where he played ok.

What makes you believe Vey will have a career with below average defensive play? Even in the AHL they don't tend to put forwards with poor defensive skills on the top pk unit. You've upset Santo wasn't re-signed and have taken such a negative view of Vey you just can't see the positives he brings.

Santorelli doesn't exactly have a cliff to fall off. He's never made it to the top of the hill.

The problem with your "extra piece" is it would have been three to four years away from NHL ready and then another couple of years in the NHL to get where you want him and that's assuming he beat the draft odds and makes the NHL at all. Whereas Vey is NHL ready now and saves several of those years of development. Just as several of the others you've mentioned as "coming up" are years away from just making the the team. I have serious doubts about Horvat sticking for the season. Trading for Vey accelerated the move to get younger.

So what? It's not like we're gonna be contending for the cup this year. We can wait a few years for our prospects to pan out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why did you say "you're assuming Horvat sticks"? Are you saying you don't think Horvat will be NHL ready in the next 1-2 years?

I'm saying that I'm not making judgement. We don't know what's going to happen in 1 to 2 years.I hope he does stick in 1 or 2 years. Do you have some magical crystal ball sir that we don't know about?

What I'm saying is you're making a lot of assumptions. It doesn't matter if it's about the present or the future. They're still assumptions. Therefore, most of your argument is either circumstantial or superficial. There's simply no facts to base it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...