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

[Waivers] Zack Kassian


AriGold

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Bingo.  Honestly can't see how unintentional-tank-nation could have issue with the potential 'downside' lol.

The thing is.  I was and am a strong Kassian supporter.  but even I see the writing on the wall.  He's done.  This could be his last chance to put it together to salvage some semblance of a career in even the AHL.

 

Whatever team that picks him up right now is going to see him motivated and at the very least be able to get some sort of production out of him.

 

We are not winning a cup this year, the team chemistry after Hank and Danny is literally zero, the production after them is about the same.

 

What harm could it do?  Will the GM look foolish for picking him up?   No.  We just sent Virtanen off to the WJC and possibly back to juniors afterwards.  We will need a larger body to make up for it or it's Friesen/Vey instead.

 

I just fail to see how it harms this team picking him up.  TV ratings down almost 30%, tickets sales down almost the same, no on ice excitement at all unless we're watching Hammer eat a puck.  Anything to change this is a good thing, even if it is last chance Zack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

I don't think it would indicate those things at all - I think it would be a case of taking advantage of a timely opportunity, and making a risk/gain/loss assessment in this particular context.

Again, not many people expect or think Benning will make a claim - but if they did, I personally would support it - I don't think it's a significant risk and I don't think it would say anything negative in particular about this management group.

I suppose, it's not a move that would shift the direction of the franchise, but Id be curious as how big of a sell this was to ownership in the first place. He was a fan favorite regardless of the few opinions that percolate around here - but so was Lack I guess.  I have not questioned any of Benning's moves to date, but this completely caught me by surprise - did not and still don't like it actually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't think it would indicate those things at all - I think it would be a case of taking advantage of a timely opportunity, and making a risk/gain/loss assessment in this particular context.

Again, not many people expect or think Benning will make a claim - but if they did, I personally would support it - I don't think it's a significant risk and I don't think it would say anything negative in particular about this management group.

My question was equally focused on how certain players would react to him being back in the clubhouse and getting another shot...whether he deserved it or not. 

I am quite confident there would be some who would welcome him back with open arms, help him out, and enjoy his presence on the ice. 

I am also equally confident there would be some who would question why this guy was back and getting playing time over them. I'd guess he probably really irked certain guys too. 

I can only think of my own experiences. I've had coworkers that I enjoyed hanging around with, good company, but would be choked if they got a promotion or a cherry assignment over me or more deserving people. As a professional, you want to see both talent and work ethic rewarded. I'd imagine there would be more than a few to think he hadn't earned a place in the room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Put yourself in Zack's shoes. Would you want to return to the scene of the crime (well one of them) so to speak. Or would you want a fresh start in a new city? Preferably a non Canadian one where you won't constantly be questioned about your past.

No - I can't put myself in Zack's shoes - I'm not Zack - I can't speak for him nor pretend to know what's best for him - so that has literally nothing to do with my perspective here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, theminister said:

My question was equally focused on how certain players would react to him being back in the clubhouse and getting another shot...whether he deserved it or not. 

I am quite confident there would be some who would welcome him back with open arms, help him out, and enjoy his presence on the ice. 

I am also equally confident there would be some who would question why this guy was back and getting playing time over them. I'd guess he probably really irked certain guys too. 

I can only think of my own experiences. I've had coworkers that I enjoyed hanging around with, good company, but would be choked if they got a promotion or a cherry assignment over me or more deserving people. As a professional, you want to see both talent and work ethic rewarded. I'd imagine there would be more than a few to think he hadn't earned a place in the room. 

I can't say one way or the other how particular players would perceive it - that would be pure speculation - and I'm not sure what the everyday reality of his work ethic or willingness to work hard are.   Subtance issues imo don't dictate that one way or the other but definitely impact that results.  Both impressions were certainly made here - the young guy training hard to get in great condition, training with the Sedins, getting more chizzled - and the young guy partying when he should be sleeping. 

I'm not of the opinion that anyone should be handed an opportunity regardless of merit - if he can't perform, he doesn't play - it's that simple - but a healthy Zack is definitely a tempting asset and waivers is a pretty low asset risk.  

In addition, not only has Jake been injured (by being run by Backes) - who also ran McCann - but the team has been depth challenged to an extent.  I'd be interested in what kind of shape he's in.

The room imo has had it's share of veteran challenges ironically.  Didn't like Miller calling out the Sedins.  Haven't liked some of Prust's comments about young guys not always being babysat.  If the room had proven a tighter and cleaner place, perhaps I'd be more cautious, but wadr to the room, it's left something to be desired at times, so if I were GM, I wouldn't necessarily be too concerned about consensus.  I'd talk to the Sedins for certain and see what their perspective is - and if there were agreement there, I wouldn't hesitate to take a chance on Zack.

I'll be surprised if the makes it 10 spots without being claimed though - I just think as a waiver claim, he's low enough risk and a rare enough type player that someone is going to risk him not putting it together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I can't say one way or the other how particular players would perceive it - that would be pure speculation - and I'm not sure what the everyday reality of his work ethic or willingness to work hard are.   Subtance issues imo don't dictate that one way or the other but definitely impact that results.  Both impressions were certainly made here - the young guy training hard to get in great condition, training with the Sedins, getting more chizzled - and the young guy partying when he should be sleeping. 

I'm not of the opinion that anyone should be handed an opportunity regardless of merit - if he can't perform, he doesn't play - it's that simple - but a healthy Zack is definitely a tempting asset and waivers is a pretty low asset risk.  

In addition, not only has Jake been injured (by being run by Backes) - who also ran McCann - but the team has been depth challenged to an extent.  I'd be interested in what kind of shape he's in.

The room imo has had it's share of veteran challenges ironically.  Didn't like Miller calling out the Sedins.  Haven't liked some of Prust's comments about young guys not always being babysat.  If the room had proven a tighter and cleaner place, perhaps I'd be more cautious, but wadr to the room, it's left something to be desired at times, so if I were GM, I wouldn't necessarily be too concerned about consensus.  I'd talk to the Sedins for certain and see what their perspective is - and if there were agreement there, I wouldn't hesitate to take a chance on Zack.

I'll be surprised if the makes it 10 spots without being claimed though - I just think as a waiver claim, he's low enough risk and a rare enough type player that someone is going to risk him not putting it together.

Agreed on all points, except I think you meant Getzlaf and not Backes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JoshuaGuy said:

Can you imagine the heaviness of a forward group that consists of Kassian, Lucic, Virtanen, Horvat, Gaunce? Higgins and Vrbata gone? I think I like the sounds of that.

Imagine getting Johansen too and mixing in the skill guys in Shinkaruk, Boeser, Baertschi etc.? We could for sure have the right mix of everything in a couple years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is cap space, so that shouldn't be a concern, at least for right now. Maybe he pulls a Grabner and turns his game around, and wouldn't that be a bit of fun. If he doesn't work out he's gone by the end of the season (RFA).

As long as there isn't any room issues (personality clashes, etc) then he may well be an asset. If he does turn things around then perhaps he gets a year or two contract at the end of the season, or perhaps another team shows some interest in acquiring Kassian's rights.

 

        regards,

G.

 

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...