Sven Baertschi | LW

[aGENT]

7 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I still have no clue why this management feels Baertschi is not an NHL player. Unless I'm missing something I'm sure he could be a solid 3rd liner for us.

 

Yes I know he declined to be a black ace.

Doesn't PK and due to our winger depth, wouldn't probably even see time on PP2. If he doesn't PP (or PK), he didn't really have a role on the team over other players (who do at least one, if not two of those things).

 

No role, no spot. It's as simple as that.

 

Now, on a lesser team, lacking middle 6 winger depth and with a healthy year behind him and only one year of 'risk' left on his contract... Hopefully he's moveable/can be picked up off waivers. But the very fact we couldn't give him away, for free, more than once, on waivers... should tell you something.

Edited September 29, 2020 by aGENT

[Noble 6]

40 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Doesn't PK and due to our winger depth, wouldn't probably even see time on PP2. If he doesn't PP (or PK), he didn't really have a role on the team over other players (who do at least one, if not two of those things).

 

No role, no spot. It's as simple as that.

 

Now, on a lesser team, lacking middle 6 winger depth and with a healthy year behind him and only one year of 'risk' left on his contract... Hopefully he's moveable/can be picked up off waivers. But the very fact we couldn't give him away, for free, more than once, on waivers... should tell you something.

 

Baertschi would absolutely have a place on PP2. 

[aGENT]

49 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Baertschi would absolutely have a place on PP2. 

Not according to our coaching staff.

[canucklehead44]

It is insane that Sven isn't playing. When he signed his contract nobody complained he was overpaid. 23 goals in 79 games and gets sent down to the farm. We traded a 2nd round pick for him and for awhile that was one of Benning's best trades. 

He has had injuries but was healthy last year, and is nowhere near Ferland fragile. 

I understand the whole stylistic fit issue but he is too good of a player and makes too much to waste toiling on the farm. A bottom feeder would be stupid to not pick him up, play him in their top 6, and possibly flip for a 3rd at the deadline to a team looking for scoring depth.

[Father Ryan]

Every time I do a mental check of what our cap situation is, I forget about Baer. At this point, unless a team is really desperate, I don't see him in the NHL anymore. Like it has been pointed out (repeatedly) he could have been a free acquisition last year, and no one tried. If we can flip him for even a 6th, just to clear his $$, I'd be satisfied. He's a good guy, but he's been passed in depth by a host of players.

[Noble 6]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Not according to our coaching staff.

 

I'm pretty sure the biggest question mark our coaching staff has is Baertschi's ability to take a hit without getting injured at this point, not his offensive ability on powerplay 2. 

 

I am 100% confident that Baertschi would have a spot on the second powerplay unit. We don't know who will be back next year (Virtanen, Toffoli, etc.) but he would definitely have a spot there. 

[Quantum]

10 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I still have no clue why this management feels Baertschi is not an NHL player. Unless I'm missing something I'm sure he could be a solid 3rd liner for us.

 

Yes I know he declined to be a black ace.

This is behind a Paywall, I know, but I'll just copy this part of the article that Harman Dayal wrote for The Athletic.

(You can find the article here -- https://theathletic.com/2096896/2020/09/28/canucks-mailbag-part-1-thatcher-demkos-trade-value-loui-eriksson-to-the-ahl/)

 

"The club sees Baertschi as a soft and slower skilled player who doesn’t mesh with the roster’s identity. Vancouver looked at Jonathan Dahlen as a player with a similar archetype and that’s why they flipped him at last year’s trade deadline."

 

Harman goes on to say he still sees Baertschi as an NHL contributor and can inject offense into a secondary offense. There were rumors that the Columbus Blue Jackets were circling Baer at the trade deadline this year. I wonder if there's a deal to be made there. I could see a Brandon Sutter & Sven Baertschi for Alex Wennberg deal come into play potentially, for example.

[Dazzle]

5 hours ago, Chickenspear said:

He just spent a year in the AHL without any issues. He's fine. 

 

I do agree with you on fitting our 3rd line. He showed great chemistry with Gaudette last training camp. Expected those 2 on a line together opening night, but he got edged o

Malhotra was not played either because of his eye injury. Of course he is "fine", but the Canucks didn't want to take that chance, which understandably left Malhotra bitter at the time.

 

The Canucks obviously like Baertschi. Green coached Baertschi in juniors and this was, presumably, one major reason why Baer was brought in in the first place. It was a 2nd round pick that panned out VERY well against Calgary. I don't think anyone will seriously argue that the Baertshi trade now was a flop, but at the time, we had people always questioning why Benning was "throwing away draft picks". Those people have largely been silenced, from what I see.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Dazzle

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

10 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Malhotra was not played either because of his eye injury. Of course he is "fine", but the Canucks didn't want to take that chance, which understandably left Malhotra bitter at the time.

 

The Canucks obviously like Baertschi. Green coached Baertschi in juniors and this was, presumably, one major reason why Baer was brought in in the first place. It was a 2nd round pick that panned out VERY well against Calgary. I don't think anyone will seriously argue that the Baertshi trade now was a flop, but at the time, we had people always questioning why Benning was "throwing away draft picks". Those people have largely been silenced, from what I see.

Do you realize that Calgary drafted Rasmus Anderson a RH Top 4 Dman with that 2nd round pick.  I’d argue that Calgary easily won the trade.  We are definitely in need of a good RHD now.  

[UKNuck96]

11 minutes ago, Sedintwinpowersactivate said:

Do you realize that Calgary drafted Rasmus Anderson a RH Top 4 Dman with that 2nd round pick.  I’d argue that Calgary easily won the trade.  We are definitely in need of a good RHD now.  

On the balance of probabilities that doesn’t happen often though, goldfish bowl hindsighting isn’t really useful, plus we dont know who the Canucks would have targeted, likelihood it wouldn’t have been Anderson

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

17 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

On the balance of probabilities that doesn’t happen often though, goldfish bowl hindsighting isn’t really useful, plus we dont know who the Canucks would have targeted, likelihood it wouldn’t have been Anderson

Hindsight is what is used to weigh a past trade.  Your right... maybe the Canucks liked Vince Dunn or Anthony Cirelli.  All we know is Calgary have a player contributing and we don’t.  Hence Calgary won the trade.

[CallAfterLife]

2 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

On the balance of probabilities that doesn’t happen often though, goldfish bowl hindsighting isn’t really useful, plus we dont know who the Canucks would have targeted, likelihood it wouldn’t have been Anderson

I hate hind-sighting reasoning as well but the Canucks did draft Brisebois the year they gave up the second round pick for Baertschi. Maybe they wouldn't have drafted Andersson but I think it's likely they would have targeted a defenceman in that spot. 

 

3 minutes ago, Sedintwinpowersactivate said:

Hindsight is what is used to weigh a past trade.  Your right... maybe the Canucks liked Vince Dunn or Anthony Cirelli.  All we know is Calgary have a player contributing and we don’t.  Hence Calgary won the trade.

If the Canucks wanted Cirelli they could have taken him instead of Brisebois. 

 

Baertschi was essentially another bargain bin / reclamation type trade like Vey and Etem and Clendening. Benning acquired him because not necessarily because he fit the long term identity of the team but was a cheap opportunity type pick up that could make the Canuck younger. 

[Lancaster]

2 hours ago, Quantum said:

This is behind a Paywall, I know, but I'll just copy this part of the article that Harman Dayal wrote for The Athletic.

(You can find the article here -- https://theathletic.com/2096896/2020/09/28/canucks-mailbag-part-1-thatcher-demkos-trade-value-loui-eriksson-to-the-ahl/)

 

"The club sees Baertschi as a soft and slower skilled player who doesn’t mesh with the roster’s identity. Vancouver looked at Jonathan Dahlen as a player with a similar archetype and that’s why they flipped him at last year’s trade deadline."

 

Harman goes on to say he still sees Baertschi as an NHL contributor and can inject offense into a secondary offense. There were rumors that the Columbus Blue Jackets were circling Baer at the trade deadline this year. I wonder if there's a deal to be made there. I could see a Brandon Sutter & Sven Baertschi for Alex Wennberg deal come into play potentially, for example.

Baertschi hasn't been a soft player for a long time now.  Maybe he was when he first entered the NHL, but I would wager that he can out-compete Virtanen along the boards and perhaps beat most players on the Canucks carrying the puck (probably only behind EP and QH).  

 

Remember during the Willie D era?  He was buzzing around the ice, competing for pucks, backchecking hard, etc.  One of the few bright spot on the Canucks roster.  

 

I understand the Canucks are supposedly worried about his concussion... but it's not like the AHL is any less physical.  I mean they let Ferland continue playing even after getting concussed a couple of times this season alone. 

A player that can play on any line, on either wing, proficient at both ends of the ice, competes hard, now in his prime.... should be a player the Canucks should have on the squad.  

[Noble 6]

36 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

Baertschi hasn't been a soft player for a long time now.  Maybe he was when he first entered the NHL, but I would wager that he can out-compete Virtanen along the boards and perhaps beat most players on the Canucks carrying the puck (probably only behind EP and QH).  

 

Remember during the Willie D era?  He was buzzing around the ice, competing for pucks, backchecking hard, etc.  One of the few bright spot on the Canucks roster.  

 

I understand the Canucks are supposedly worried about his concussion... but it's not like the AHL is any less physical.  I mean they let Ferland continue playing even after getting concussed a couple of times this season alone. 

A player that can play on any line, on either wing, proficient at both ends of the ice, competes hard, now in his prime.... should be a player the Canucks should have on the squad.  

 

There are multiple things that are just frustrating to think about in this situation. 

Baertschi was a soft player at first, but he is an example of committing to playing a harder, more responsible game. He took it upon himself to make that change, but then got slapped in the face with the demotion. He was an example of how putting in the work and effort to improve your game can be rewarded, until he wasn't. 

 

As you said, if the concussions and injury history were a concern, how did the same management and coaching staff bring in Ferland as a UFA coming off of injury and then start him in the Playoffs after a potentially career ending concussion? There's a clear double standard that seems to be there just because Ferland is bigger. 

 

Bottom-6 scoring has been a struggle for the Canucks despite the amount of money that's been invested in it. If we lose Virtanen (which I think is pretty likely), our bottom-6 scoring will go down even more. I think the Baertschi bridge has already been burned, but its still something that puzzles and irritates me. 

[Lancaster]

5 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

There are multiple things that are just frustrating to think about in this situation. 

Baertschi was a soft player at first, but he is an example of committing to playing a harder, more responsible game. He took it upon himself to make that change, but then got slapped in the face with the demotion. He was an example of how putting in the work and effort to improve your game can be rewarded, until he wasn't. 

 

As you said, if the concussions and injury history were a concern, how did the same management and coaching staff bring in Ferland as a UFA coming off of injury and then start him in the Playoffs after a potentially career ending concussion? There's a clear double standard that seems to be there just because Ferland is bigger. 

 

Bottom-6 scoring has been a struggle for the Canucks despite the amount of money that's been invested in it. If we lose Virtanen (which I think is pretty likely), our bottom-6 scoring will go down even more. I think the Baertschi bridge has already been burned, but its still something that puzzles and irritates me. 

It definitely very strange.  

Baertschi was one of Coach Green's go-to guy in Utica.  Plus he was also used in all situations when Travis Green first coached the Canucks.  When the Sedins needed a boost, put Sven to take a shift or two.  Need more scoring, have him with Bo.  Need to send a message to the team.... demote or scratch Baertschi.  

 

Makes you wonder if there's something behind the scene.  Did Sven run over Benning's dog?  Did he steal Green's lunch?  Something much have happened to make him like a pariah... and concussion isn't it.  

[Dazzle]

8 hours ago, Sedintwinpowersactivate said:

Hindsight is what is used to weigh a past trade.  Your right... maybe the Canucks liked Vince Dunn or Anthony Cirelli.  All we know is Calgary have a player contributing and we don’t.  Hence Calgary won the trade.

That is not very accurate reasoning. If New Jersey drafts the next Gretzky with the (low) 1st round pick that came from Tampa (Miller trade), which would be highly unlikely, would you still say that "Tampa got fleeced"? No, that's complete nonsense. No one would have any knowledge how a pick will pan out, ESPECIALLY a low 1st round pick. Similarly, a 2nd round pick was SOMETHING - and we got SOMETHING. A trade normally involves two trading partners who are happy with what they got.

 

Calgary didn't "easily" win the trade, but we got good usage of Baertschi as well. The 2nd round pick was not really a waste.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Dazzle

[MrCanuck94]

14 hours ago, aGENT said:

Doesn't PK and due to our winger depth, wouldn't probably even see time on PP2. If he doesn't PP (or PK), he didn't really have a role on the team over other players (who do at least one, if not two of those things).

 

No role, no spot. It's as simple as that.

 

Now, on a lesser team, lacking middle 6 winger depth and with a healthy year behind him and only one year of 'risk' left on his contract... Hopefully he's moveable/can be picked up off waivers. But the very fact we couldn't give him away, for free, more than once, on waivers... should tell you something.

I don't think Roussel plays on the PK either and Baertschi over him on PP2 any day tbh in my opinion.

[Chickenspear]

8 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I don't think Roussel plays on the PK either and Baertschi over him on PP2 any day tbh in my opinion.

I think it's a tough call on Baertschi, tbh. I think Green wanted a bit of a physical, defensive minded forward with Gaudette, and it's been working alright. Team leaders in points are our top six, followed by Virtanen and Gaudette, with Leivo on pace for the same PPG before he was injured. I think Baer on the third line would be worth a look at training camp, try to get more secondary scoring... liked the chemistry he had with Gaudette last pre-season.

[Googlie]

18 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

Baertschi was a soft player at first, but he is an example of committing to playing a harder, more responsible game. He took it upon himself to make that change, but then got slapped in the face with the demotion. He was an example of how putting in the work and effort to improve your game can be rewarded, until he wasn't. 

 

As you said, if the concussions and injury history were a concern, how did the same management and coaching staff bring in Ferland as a UFA coming off of injury and then start him in the Playoffs after a potentially career ending concussion? There's a clear double standard that seems to be there just because Ferland is bigger. 

 

 

So how do you explain Baertschi's invitation to join the black aces for the playoff run?

 

No double standard at all. No running over dogs or stealing mail (or whatever)  ...  management were impressed with his professionalism, durability and production in Utica, and rewarded him by inclusion in the 32 players identified for the restart.  I don't think they were at all put off by his decision to spend 2 months with family rather than sitting bemasked in the bubble gallery.

 

He cleared waivers to go to Utica because other teams were hesitant about his full recovery - and Benning fuelled those doubts by saying after camp that Sven had "seemed tentative"  These doubts have been allayed, hence interest in him at the trade deadline.

 

In Brock's rookie year I thought that the "Killer Bees" was one of the more effective lines in the NHL. And could be even more potent with Sven's commitment to a 200 foot game.

 

But what do I know -  just an armchair critic

[Noble 6]

11 minutes ago, Googlie said:

So how do you explain Baertschi's invitation to join the black aces for the playoff run?

 

No double standard at all. No running over dogs or stealing mail (or whatever)  ...  management were impressed with his professionalism, durability and production in Utica, and rewarded him by inclusion in the 32 players identified for the restart.  I don't think they were at all put off by his decision to spend 2 months with family rather than sitting bemasked in the bubble gallery.

 

He cleared waivers to go to Utica because other teams were hesitant about his full recovery - and Benning fuelled those doubts by saying after camp that Sven had "seemed tentative"  These doubts have been allayed, hence interest in him at the trade deadline.

 

In Brock's rookie year I thought that the "Killer Bees" was one of the more effective lines in the NHL. And could be even more potent with Sven's commitment to a 200 foot game.

 

But what do I know -  just an armchair critic

 

The same way I explain Bailey's invitation: he was going to be a spare below the 13th forward spot. I don't think that means much in terms of giving him another shot. Baertschi knew that and decided to stay home after his own personal evaluation. There were, at minimum, 15 forwards ahead of him at the start of the return to play. 

 

Was there interest in Baertschi as a player, or Baertschi as a cap dump to land other assets?

 

I also thought that the Baertschi - Horvat connection was a good one for the team regardless of who ended up on LW. I think Baertschi would have provided more scoring support than Pearson, who often went cold for long stretches. He also showed well with Gaudette in the preseason. I think no matter where he played, he would have provided a reasonably effective offensive presence.