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

[Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

The numbers on Top are Linden Vey's first full AHL season the bottom is Shinkaruk's Vey scored 67 the second season, Shinkaruk is sitting at 39 pointson pace for 65-68. What about him screams near all star to you? 

AHL stats don't always translate, so that proves nothing. The intangibles of his game. If Vey was given a full NHL season and a half based on those stats, why didn't they give Shinkaruk a chance like that before making any decisions to trade him.

 

Benning's logic: Not drafted by Benning, not on the team. Gaunce is next. Gaunce and Shinkaruk paid their dues in the AHL last year, but Benning decided to bring up Virtanen and McCann instead. I'm not saying they didn't earn it, because they did, but Gaunce and Shinkaruk deserved an NHL look more than just 1 or 2 games. First impressions are important, but they both deserved a second chance at cracking the Canucks roster. Basically, Jim Benning assumes Gaunce and Shinkaruk aren't good enough when clearly they both made a strong case for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Green Goblin said:

AHL stats don't always translate, so that proves nothing. The intangibles of his game. If Vey was given a full NHL season and a half based on those stats, why didn't they give Shinkaruk a chance like that before making any decisions to trade him.

 

Benning's logic: Not drafted by Benning, not on the team. Gaunce is next. Gaunce and Shinkaruk paid their dues in the AHL last year, but Benning decided to bring up Virtanen and McCann instead. I'm not saying they didn't earn it, because they did, but Gaunce and Shinkaruk deserved an NHL look more than just 1 or 2 games. First impressions are important, but they both deserved a second chance at cracking the Canucks' lineup. Basically, Jim Benning assumes Gaunce and Shinkaruk aren't good enough when clearly they both made a strong case for themselves.

Shinkaruk's intangibles aren't that good though, yes he's fast but soft in puck battles as well as below average defense. He's like Vrbata useful when scoring meh everywhere else. 

 

Granlund is an all around player that can also score and a player the Canucks wanted, Shinkaruk was the asking price whether you like it or not. 

 

Sometimes it's not about deserving second chances, did Shinkaruk deserve a look? Yeah of course, but he was also not in Bennings long term plans. So rather than have him stay in limbo here Benning moved him to a team that will give him a shot and got a player in return that suits his long term plans.

 

I think this move also signifies the end of Vey here too as Benning has found a more useful player in Granlund. I also feel this means that Gaunce has surpassed Shinkaruk in managements eyes as they've done nothing but praise the strides he's made before and during the season. 

 

People here need to stop knee jerk reacting to every trade and wait for the whole picture to unfold. It'll be much clearer after the deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

It's not blind faith it's seeing what plan management has unfold Benning hasn't been here 2 years yet...

 

There's way more blind bashing around here than blind faith anyway. 

True enough, good or bad it's better to take a step back and wait for the trade deadline to get a complete picture of what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, goblix said:

True enough, good or bad it's better to take a step back and wait for the trade deadline to get a complete picture of what happened.

If this is the only move we make I agree its puzzling  as it's a lateral move on its own. I do see Vey, Vrbata likely going, Hamhuis is a possibility and Prust, Higgins and Weber are 50/50 to go as well. 

 

We'll see how it goes next week but honestly this move has the feel of being the first of a few. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Shinkaruk's intangibles aren't that good though, yes he's fast but soft in puck battles as well as below average defense. He's like Vrbata useful when scoring meh everywhere else. 

 

Granlund is an all around player that can also score and a player the Canucks wanted, Shinkaruk was the asking price whether you like it or not. 

 

Sometimes it's not about deserving second chances, did Shinkaruk deserve a look? Yeah of course, but he was also not in Bennings long term plans. So rather than have him stay in limbo here Benning moved him to a team that will give him a shot and got a player in return that suits his long term plans.

 

I think this move also signifies the end of Vey here too as Benning has found a more useful player in Granlund. I also feel this means that Gaunce has surpassed Shinkaruk in managements eyes as they've done nothing but praise the strides he's made before and during the season. 

 

People here need to stop knee jerk reacting to every trade and wait for the whole picture to unfold. It'll be much clearer after the deadline.

Yes they are! Hand-eye is one of the most important traits in a sport where your reflexes will make or break your success. Speed has always been a key factor in all aspects of the game. Shinkaruk has the speed, the rest of his game can be developed. We were patient with the Sedins, despite them not being strong enough around the boards when they first started. Why couldn't we be patient with Hunter?

 

Also, if Hunter is as gifted as Vrbata offensively, wouldn't he be a good fit with Baer and Bo?

 

Baertschi-Horvat-Shinkaruk
Playmaker-Two-way-Sniper

 

Doesn't matter if I like it or not, I stand by my opinion. I believe we could have acquired Granlund for less, based on previous trades of similar magnitude. He isn't in the limbo though, he was developing well in Utica.  

 

Look at these stats:

 

1. 51gp 15g 25a 40p

2. 45gp 21g 18a 39p

 

1. Baertschi
2. Shinkaruk

 

Very similar numbers, both from their most recent AHL season. Baertschi was considered a soft perimeter player, but we gave him some time to find his game and gain chemistry with his teammates. Now he is producing at a 25-30 goal pace since he scored his first goal. 

 

Gaunce has done well but so has Shinkaruk. What's wrong with having a great two-way player and a pure sniper? Versatility can be developed. Wingers can usually play either side so it doesn't affect the depth chart that much considering Burrows and Vrbata are nearing the end of their productive days. As well as Higgins and Prust already out of the roster. Basically, we can afford to have multiple quality wingers in the system.

 

Most of us fans have seen Hunter play, so we know what we are giving up in order to get Granlund. Call it whatever you want, but the majority right now say we shouldn't have traded him.

                         
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, meh_wassup said:

No I know it's not he could have waited until the summer, I mean Shinkaruk is a ticking time bomb pending UFA who we would lose for nothing he doesn't get traded before the deadline.

 

Hmmm actually I might be thinking of some other players.

Vrbata and Hammer are gonna carry us to the playoffs yo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Green Goblin said:

Yes they are! Hand-eye is one of the most important traits in a sport where your reflexes will make or break your success. Speed has always been a key factor in all aspects of the game. Shinkaruk has the speed, the rest of his game can be developed. We were patient with the Sedins, despite them not being strong enough around the boards when they first started. Why couldn't we be patient with Hunter?

 

Also, if Hunter is as gifted as Vrbata offensively, wouldn't he be a good fit with Baer and Bo?

 

Baertschi-Horvat-Shinkaruk
Playmaker-Two-way-Sniper

 

Doesn't matter if I like it or not, I stand by my opinion. I believe we could have acquired Granlund for less, based on previous trades of similar magnitude. He isn't in the limbo though, he was developing well in Utica.  

 

Look at these stats:

 

1. 51gp 15g 25a 40p

2. 45gp 21g 18a 39p

 

1. Baertschi
2. Shinkaruk

 

Very similar numbers, both from their most recent AHL season. Baertschi was considered a soft perimeter player, but we gave him some time to find his game and gain chemistry with his teammates. Now he is producing at a 25-30 goal pace since he scored his first goal. 

 

Gaunce has done well but so has Shinkaruk. What's wrong with having a great two-way player and a pure sniper? 

Versatility can be developed. Wingers can usually play either side so it doesn't affect the depth chart that much considering Burrows and Vrbata are nearing the end of their productive days. As well as Higgins and Prust already out of the roster. Basically, we can afford to have multiple quality wingers in the system.

 

Most of us fans have seen Hunter play, so we know what we are giving up in order to get Granlund. Call it whatever you want, but the majority right now say we shouldn't have traded him.

                         

I've seen both play and the trade is literally a wash. Overreacting fans are overreacting. Van gets a player for a player not in our plans and Cal gets a player for a player not in their plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trade is a wash from the perspective of points and offensive production.

Granlund brings us center/faceoff capabilities - bonus.

Granlund brings us slightly more size - bonus (but not much point)

Granlund brings us more defensive awareness - big bonus

Shinkaruk brought skill and the POTENTIAL to be a really skilled winger - bonus, but how much of a bonus it is remains to be elucidated

 

I think Granlund is the better player all up, but the Canucks don't need another defensive center unless one of Horvat, McCann, Gaunce, Cassels or Vey are getting traded. We've still got Sutter for a while too. Our depth at center is fine, but we lack top-end elite offensive talent. I believe Shink had more a chance of that than Granlund but it's pretty much a wash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, meh_wassup said:

No I know it's not he could have waited until the summer, I mean Shinkaruk is a ticking time bomb pending UFA who we would lose for nothing he doesn't get traded before the deadline.

 

Hmmm actually I might be thinking of some other players.

I too remember when Mike Gillis would hold off for better deals. It was great when we had valuable assets that never got moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the boys in management were thinking...

 

Markus Granlund - Markus Naslund = 

Gr - S (Remainders)

Gr for Granlund - S for Shinkaruk

 

By this formula of subtracting identical letters, we are left with the formula for this trade, "Gr-S" as stated above. Which obviously means Granlund for Shinkaruk.

 

Since the Finns are the new Swedes; Laine, Puljujarvi, and Granlund are the future Finnish Forsberg, Sundin, and Naslund.

 

Time to load up for picks for Vrbata and Hammer, if he waives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

It's not blind faith it's seeing what plan management has unfold Benning hasn't been here 2 years yet...

 

There's way more blind bashing around here than blind faith anyway. 

well, jb intimated the team he inherited could win the cup when he came here 2 yrs ago.  believing that would have taken blind faith for anyone who had been following this team.  so, he kept the team together and let the assets dwindle.  now, if he is no more than a puppet for aquilini then that is his problem.  as far as i am concerned, he was hired to manage this team.  we all know what happened in the 1st round to the flame powerhouse.  so . . . the plan looks more than a wee bit chaotic  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

The trade is a wash from the perspective of points and offensive production.

Granlund brings us center/faceoff capabilities - bonus.

Granlund brings us slightly more size - bonus (but not much point)

Granlund brings us more defensive awareness - big bonus

Shinkaruk brought skill and the POTENTIAL to be a really skilled winger - bonus, but how much of a bonus it is remains to be elucidated

 

I think Granlund is the better player all up, but the Canucks don't need another defensive center unless one of Horvat, McCann, Gaunce, Cassels or Vey are getting traded. We've still got Sutter for a while too. Our depth at center is fine, but we lack top-end elite offensive talent. I believe Shink had more a chance of that than Granlund but it's pretty much a wash.

-He's not good at face offs (Can be worked on)

-Size he lacks, he is a bit soft but he doesn't give up on the puck easily. 

 

He has heavy wrist shot (needs to use it more), he's pretty good in the defensive zone, playing with the right players he can be very useful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am okay with the trade because I trust the judgmenet of our management team that has like 100 years more of valuable hockey experience than I do.. However I will say that if trading Shinkaruk was always the plan, and it sounds like it was, I would have thought that you could have added him to a deal either at the deadline or at the draft as a SIGNIFICANT sweetener.

 

Overreacting to a deal like this is, quite literally, a waste of energy. We have no way of knowing who 'won' the trade until both Granlund and Shinkaruk play a significant number of NHL games... IF they ever even get to that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund
  • -SN- unpinned this topic

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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