Benning on the TSN 1040 (May 29)

[2SKATES1STICK]

And Clendening like Yannik Weber 4 years ago...

and vey like kyle wellwood with less hands and face-off ability and vision

[Outsiders]

Sedin-Sedin-Kassian

Baertschi-Horvat-Vrbata

Burrows-Bonino-Hansen

Dorsett-Richardson-Virtanen

Edler-Tanev

Hamhuis-Clendening

Sbisa-Bieksa

Lack

Markstrom

[Provost]

I can see some of the fringe D being moved out and a top 4 guy being acquired.

Corrado is a pretty easy target for being moved, as is Stanton and Weber. I can also see Hamhuis being moved (Bieksa is probably the least likely guy to waive his NTC).

In some of the moves (including a couple forwards going out), I could see us getting a couple of D prospects for Utica who are close to NHL ready but still able to move up and down without waivers. That is the only way Benning gets to his stated goal of having 11 NHL capable D. With Clenndening and Corrado not being able to stay down there, we pretty much have zero call-ups.

Of guys with pro experience in Utica that even have a chance at playing in the NHL next year as a short term injury replacement, we will have Biega, Fox, and Pedan. Those just aren't names that would make anyone in management comfortable if we had to use them regularly. We can't pick up waver wire guys to improve as they would also have to clear to use.

That means the only route is trading for them in the summer.

[Qwags]

I really hope they keep Stanton. Was great with Clrndening this year but was left to dry with Sbisa as well.

Dont know why he wasnt paired with Bieksa, they looked awesome last year.

To me they should get rid of Weber if they want Ehrhoff. The guy was good as a 6th dman but seemed way in over his head at times this season. At least he shot the puck though.... Something the other dmen cant really say

I second this. I believe that Stanton is an excellent 5/6 D-man, and should be given more opportunities.

[tas]

I can see some of the fringe D being moved out and a top 4 guy being acquired.

Corrado is a pretty easy target for being moved, as is Stanton and Weber. I can also see Hamhuis being moved (Bieksa is probably the least likely guy to waive his NTC).

In some of the moves (including a couple forwards going out), I could see us getting a couple of D prospects for Utica who are close to NHL ready but still able to move up and down without waivers. That is the only way Benning gets to his stated goal of having 11 NHL capable D. With Clenndening and Corrado not being able to stay down there, we pretty much have zero call-ups.

Of guys with pro experience in Utica that even have a chance at playing in the NHL next year as a short term injury replacement, we will have Biega, Fox, and Pedan. Those just aren't names that would make anyone in management comfortable if we had to use them regularly. We can't pick up waver wire guys to improve as they would also have to clear to use.

That means the only route is trading for them in the summer.

if management values the cap space and/or roster spot they'd gain by moving bieksa more than they value the return he's likely to get in a trade (like they did with garrison), it doesn't matter if he's willing to waive his no-trade.

"hey kevin, would you rather play in columbus or toronto?"

"uh, neither, and i won't waive."

"ok, edmonton it is then."

[stawns]

if management values the cap space and/or roster spot they'd gain by moving bieksa more than they value the return he's likely to get in a trade (like they did with garrison), it doesn't matter if he's willing to waive his no-trade.

"hey kevin, would you rather play in columbus or toronto?"

"uh, neither, and i won't waive."

"ok, edmonton it is then."

except he doesn't leave if he doesn't want to.

[tas]

except he doesn't leave if he doesn't want to.

he has a no-trade, not a no-move.

the entire point of my post is that they'd waive him, or at least threaten to.

[D-Money]

I think we definitely need to keep Markstrom.

Would Miller for SJ 1st be fair? We may need to add a prospect.

Could be another goalie trade for 9th overall again!

Draft Zach Werenski or Matt Barzal.

If Miller were willing to waive his NTC to go there, and San Jose was willing to take the contract on, I think most here would be happy with a 2nd in return...heck, even a 3rd. The 6 million of cap space is the real return there.

No way they're trading a top-10 pick for him! ...Unless, of course, we were packaging our own 1st and another prospect to move up.

[elvis15]

he has a no-trade, not a no-move.

the entire point of my post is that they'd waive him, or at least threaten to.

Yeah, but that's a stupid point. Things would have to get pretty bad before they'd force Bieksa out by waiving him.

[Me_]

Interesting. So Markstrom sounds like he'll be on the squad next year. Miller or Lack now will be gone. Also, it sounds like he might move a D or two to recover our second/third picks. Gonna be a suspenseful off season!

Out of all of that, you go for the goalie controversy.

Deplorable really.

[Me_]

he has a no-trade, not a no-move.

the entire point of my post is that they'd waive him, or at least threaten to.

Threaten Bieksa; great business management tactics.

[tas]

Yeah, but that's a stupid point. Things would have to get pretty bad before they'd force Bieksa out by waiving him.

do you doubt that they would have waived garrison last year?

granted, bieksa certainly has deeper roots in vancouver than garrison did, but business is business.

they won't re-sign him when his contract is up. they're ready to move on. either help the team by allowing a trade or don't, but keeping him around for another meaningless year benefits nobody.

[Standing_Tall#37]

Yeah, but that's a stupid point. Things would have to get pretty bad before they'd force Bieksa out by waiving him.

Considering that there's fan bases that were willing last off season to give a 1st, a prospect and a roster player for him. I bet the return on him would be more than most think if indeed Benning and Bieksa agreed it was time to part ways.

[VegasCanuck]

Stop talking about upcoming mgt meetings.

Should lousy deals(Vey, Sbisa) bite him on the azz, will he claim there were 'group' mistakes made? At least Gillis took responsibility for decisions & direction.

They were good deals in general. Sbisa still has more to learn, but he's coming in the age that most defenseman really mature. Vey is still young, players develop at different rates. I won't say that Vey had a great season, but there were signs that he has what it takes, just needs to focus more on his intensity level.

[VegasCanuck]

If Higgins is on the PP over Baertschi I'd be really upset lol.

Benning wants to get younger, faster and more physical. Someone make a checklist of how much of that Jake Virtanen covers

As long as he's ready to do it for 82 games at an NHL level. If he does the work he needs to over summer, I think he has a good shot. Would love to see him here next year!

[aGENT]

Threaten Bieksa; great business management tactics.

Good way to get Bieksa to make this face

[elvis15]

do you doubt that they would have waived garrison last year?

granted, bieksa certainly has deeper roots in vancouver than garrison did, but business is business.

they won't re-sign him when his contract is up. they're ready to move on. either help the team by allowing a trade or don't, but keeping him around for another meaningless year benefits nobody.

It wouldn't have (and didn't) come to that with Garrison, but if he'd refused then they would have made do. They didn't trade him because he's bad, rather that they wanted to go a different route and Hamhuis/Bieksa weren't likely to waive. I'd rather have Garrison now with Bieksa declining.

I agree he likely won't be re-signed when his current deal is up, but that doesn't mean he'll waive his NTC because of it, or that the Canucks will force the issue by putting him on waivers. They'd just let his contract run out if they couldn't trade him.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Clendening/Corrado are 6/7 d men right now and don't project to be better than maybe #4 guys at all.

Say what you want about Ehrhoff not being the player he was but he's better than either of those guys and has proven chemistry with Edler and the twins (albeit all a bit diminished with age).

Him at 2-3 year gives us time to develop Hutton, Subban, McNally, 2015 draft 1st rounder in to NHL players.

I'd prefer we go Green or go home too but Benning's already stated that's not happening.

I can see your point but

At some point Corrado and Clendening are going to be put in an NHL spot. Whether you think they are projected 6/7 D or not the only way they get NHL experience is through playing. Not by sitting out, If Benning doesn’t believe these young players are ever going to be NHL regulars then trade them, it’s a waste to have prospect that can’t be sent down sit in the stands.

All adding Ehrhoff does is create a band aid and block one of those roster spot. Is a lateral move to sign Ehrhoff only to let Hamhuis and/or Bieska walk next season. It delays a year of growth in our prospect pool. Rookies don’t just generally come in and tear it up in their first season, it takes two or three years for them to get in a groove.

If this team’s goal is to make the post season and make a run, Ehrhoff isn’t the answer. Put our best foot forward, free up some cap space with a trade and go all in to sign the big UFA, if not then lets at least get something out of next season, lets develop some youth so that the next year we are better off because of it. Signing Ehrhoff would be the equivalent of going out and signing another bottom 6 center and keeping Vey on the outside.

We gave up assets and put in time to bring players like Clendening, Corrado, and Vey, if we’re not going to use them or put them in a spot to succeed, then it’s time to move on. Honestly there are probably more question marks on hutton subban and mcNally so lets use what we have for now

[aGENT]

I can see your point but

At some point Corrado and Clendening are going to be put in an NHL spot. Whether you think they are projected 6/7 D or not the only way they get NHL experience is through playing. Not by sitting out, If Benning doesn’t believe these young players are ever going to be NHL regulars then trade them, it’s a waste to have prospect that can’t be sent down sit in the stands.

All adding Ehrhoff does is create a band aid and block one of those roster spot. Is a lateral move to sign Ehrhoff only to let Hamhuis and/or Bieska walk next season. It delays a year of growth in our prospect pool. Rookies don’t just generally come in and tear it up in their first season, it takes two or three years for them to get in a groove.

If this team’s goal is to make the post season and make a run, Ehrhoff isn’t the answer. Put our best foot forward, free up some cap space with a trade and go all in to sign the big UFA, if not then lets at least get something out of next season, lets develop some youth so that the next year we are better off because of it. Signing Ehrhoff would be the equivalent of going out and signing another bottom 6 center and keeping Vey on the outside.

We gave up assets and put in time to bring players like Clendening, Corrado, and Vey, if we’re not going to use them or put them in a spot to succeed, then it’s time to move on. Honestly there are probably more question marks on hutton subban and mcNally so lets use what we have for now

I never projected them to become 6/7 guys, they're currently 6/7 guys. They're projected to become 4-6 guys.

There's ALWAYS injuries on D. They'll get playing time just like 6/7 guys do every year. That doesn't mean they're "not going to be NHL players". It means they're not "permanent" top 6 players yet.

The team's goal should be to fill roster holes. Neither Corrado or Clendening currently do that. Adding Ehrhoff doesn't block anything so long as you make other, appropriate moves. All he'd do would make our d-core better, better balanced and faster.

[Canuck Surfer]

I wouldn't be surprised if we took a run for a trade at a guy like Kulikov from Florida.

JB seems inclined to package both up and down, so I foresee us moving multiple assets for a body and moving a body (bodies) for picks.

And this is what we need to do.

In can be argued we have redundancies on our team. At forward and on D. Certainly at least one goalie. And CDC complains about some of these guys. But they are valid, legit NHL bodies.

We also have components we do not have on our team and it poses a challenge for our coach.

We should be playing a bit of musical chairs. Get some bodies that offer skill sets the team needs!

.