Ilya Mikheyev Posted August 23, 2015 Author Share Posted August 23, 2015 Also, Hamhuis and Franson were part of the same organization for years, and played a full season together in NSH. He might have something to say about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kran Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Who's Fran, and why is she on watch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 We would have space had he not blown money on Bartkowski and traded Bonino... -___- :@ Spending the dough on Bartkowski in not nearly as bad as blowing $1.5M cap hit on Weber. Bartkowski @ $1.75M >>>> Weber @ $1.5M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 I'd like Franson, but it sounds like he's demanding too much money or term here. He's okay, and can produce points, but seriously needs to work on his defensive game before he can demand big money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Mikheyev Posted August 23, 2015 Author Share Posted August 23, 2015 I'd like Franson, but it sounds like he's demanding too much money or term here. He's okay, and can produce points, but seriously needs to work on his defensive game before he can demand big money. Yeah, exactly. The most the Canucks could risk for him is a Semin-like contract (1 year x 1M). I think he would look good next to Edler on the 1st PP, but I don't think he's worth moving anyone on the current roster for (cap space wise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 apparently, bartkowski is a good skater and puck mover...franson...not so much...benning knows both talents...he choses bartkowski. that's good enough for me. This is well known of Bartkowski's skill set, he is also an underrated physical player. I think people will be pleasantly surprised the Canucks added Bartkowski. Lol no. He "chose"/was forced Bartkowski because of $ restrictions. If Franson would sign for that much he'd be in Rogers Arena practicing as we speak. Benning was not forced, it's quite simple - a defenseman who can be physical, excellent in transition and a good skater ? or the defenseman who can put up more numbers on the powerplay but struggles in other aspects of defense play ? Bartkowski is the better option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Lol no. He "chose"/was forced Bartkowski because of $ restrictions. If Franson would sign for that much he'd be in Rogers Arena practicing as we speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Benning was not forced, it's quite simple - a defenseman who can be physical, excellent in transition and a good skater ? or the defenseman who can put up more numbers on the powerplay but struggles in other aspects of defense play ? Bartkowski is the better option. I disagree. Franson is more of a (possible/likely) Hamhuis replacement than Bartkowski will ever be. Bartowski is a 3rd pairing, fringe #4 dman. Franson is a Ehrhoff ish type player. Sure he's not the greatest defensively but he's good on the PP and offense. And paired up with the right guy (Tanev or someone like that) to ground him, he could do really good for us. Not to mention he hits and blocks shots quite a bit. And it was cap restrictions. I'm 99% sure if we had $5m in cap, Benning would spend it to ink Franson. If Franson signs a 1 year deal and is a UFA next offseason it won't be that easy of a no brainer because there are still quite a few solid pending UFA d set to hit the market. Either way Franson or not, JB will get that top 4 d signed next summer if Hamhuis is dealt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 This is well known of Bartkowski's skill set, he is also an underrated physical player. I think people will be pleasantly surprised the Canucks added Bartkowski. Benning was not forced, it's quite simple - a defenseman who can be physical, excellent in transition and a good skater ? or the defenseman who can put up more numbers on the powerplay but struggles in other aspects of defense play ? Bartkowski is the better option. Bart is a LHD, Franson is a right. They play in different situations and have different things to offer. Franson is 6'5'' and has a big shot. Bartkowski has ZERO NHL goals career to date. Cody does have something to offer. Bart is here for something else. In reality we could use both. Money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 I disagree. Franson is more of a (possible/likely) Hamhuis replacement than Bartkowski will ever be. Bartowski is a 3rd pairing, fringe #4 dman. Franson is a Ehrhoff ish type player. Sure he's not the greatest defensively but he's good on the PP and offense. And paired up with the right guy (Tanev or someone like that) to ground him, he could do really good for us. Not to mention he hits and blocks shots quite a bit. And it was cap restrictions. I'm 99% sure if we had $5m in cap, Benning would spend it to ink Franson. If Franson signs a 1 year deal and is a UFA next offseason it won't be that easy of a no brainer because there are still quite a few solid pending UFA d set to hit the market. Either way Franson or not, JB will get that top 4 d signed next summer if Hamhuis is dealt. That is silly as well. Hamhuis is Bartkowski on steroids in regards to game smarts and handling the puck. Also near 15 lbs bigger, has close out speed. Mobile 210 lb 2 way D. Hamhuis > Franson! Franson is, again, a right handed D. There for his shot. To make hits, clear the crease, equalize board battles and score. Would probably actually make a great pairing with someone like Hamhuis. Who's speed covers for some of his liabilities. In any case Franson is probably only good if you have a Hamhuis. The reverse is not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Too bad benning didn't make a move for him he is the exact type of d this team has lacked for years. Hamhuis should have been moved to make room for this guy someone that can shoot and be effective on the pp plus he's younger. Had benning picked up a player like franson it would be more believable that he was actually trying to make the team competative but instead he got bartwhatever yet another bottom pairing fill in. To go with the third and 4th liners filling the roster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 I'd like a line up Edler Tanev Hamhuis Franson Sbisa Corrado Bart And it wont happen. But next year... Edler Seabrook Hamhuis Tanev Sbisa Corrado Hutton Subban top pair on Comets and ready for a call up. And a first round pick for Vrbata... Looks soooo much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 ^mean in terms of replenishing a top 4 d. Lost Juice and hasn't been replaced. Losing Hamhuis will need to sign minimum 1 top 4 to stop the bleeding. Whether it's a RHD or LHD any will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 if buffalo picks him up then theyre are near locks for playoffs With what "proven" goaltender? Also, as much as I like Eichel, he hasn't proven anything. The Sabres have a lot of great youth, t none are entering their prime. Likely they are 2-3 years away from "near locks" for the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Weasel Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 We would have space had he not blown money on Bartkowski and traded Bonino... -___- :@ ... or signed Sbisa to that ridiculous contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Wouldn't we better better off saving the money for Seabrook next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanGnome Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 “I’m hopeful that [...Enter Team Name Here...] is in the mix come July 1" "I want to play in roles that make me earn the money we are going to be asking for, the powerplay role is huge for me." "Obviously I'd like something more than one year," Franson said on TSN 1040. "I'm sick of one-year deals." Comes across as kind of whiny and self entitled. Not doing a very good job of selling himself, IMO. To me it sounds like a guy who's paid his dues, and simply wants to be rewarded with security so he can just go about his business and do what he does. Having to constantly showcase yourself year after year for a one year contract has to take an immense toll. I'm not saying he's deserving of stupid money, but he's getting a bit older and for sure deserves to get at minimum a 3 year term at sensible money to have a shot at putting together some consistency with the same team. A 30 year old Franson after 3 solid years would still be good for 4-5 years at 4-5 mill per year, assuming the cap continues to rise. Franson will never be a dominant #1/2 but a very good complimentary 3/4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Wouldn't we better better off saving the money for Seabrook next season? We'd be soooooooo much better off. Seabrook >>>>> Franson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Franson is worthy of a hashtag and a watch because it is important that he gets a long term contract and I think he'll get one soon because it makes the most business sense. There are many teams that can affort him, but I think he will end up on a team that values the things that Franson brings the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 We'd be soooooooo much better off. Seabrook >>>>> Franson. The likelihood of us getting Franson right now vs Seabrook next year is also much greater. Seabrook will get 7+ in free agency as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.