Tre Mac Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 I'd put Gaunce second last on the forward depth chart, just ahead of Burmy only because Gaunce is younger and I am still praying he can developed. But as it stands right now he's not fit for this league. Whatever he brings defensively is negated big time by his lack of speed, offense and physicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Gaunce coming of surgery, most players have a hard time coming in if they miss camp as a Hold out let alone surgery/recovery this young player had shoulder surgery I can see why he’s a little timid about laying the body for now. I like gaunce he has been a solid defensive player and when he was heathy last season he did use his size and strength at both ends. He gets a longer “leash” just for those reasons but it makes him a easy candidate to rest and rotate the others in too. Even if there’s a long list of vets that should sit ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 3 hours ago, Tre Mac said: I'd put Gaunce second last on the forward depth chart, just ahead of Burmy only because Gaunce is younger and I am still praying he can developed. But as it stands right now he's not fit for this league. Whatever he brings defensively is negated big time by his lack of speed, offense and physicality. Agree with offense and not enough physicality but Gaunce does not have a speed problem. His setups last night were solid scoring chances which his line mates did not convert. Canucks are not going anywhere this year and it is the time for Gaunce to get his TOI and develop. I would drop Gagner and Burmy before Gaunce. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 If people would just view Gaunce as a young, bottom 6 forward version of Tanev, I think they'd have far less concerns about his play. He's all about low event, solid d zone play that transitions the puck out of our end. There's literally nothing flashy or terribly exciting about his game. Like Tanev, he's not going to put up gaudy offensive numbers or wow you with physicality or energy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 59 minutes ago, aGENT said: If people would just view Gaunce as a young, bottom 6 forward version of Tanev, I think they'd have far less concerns about his play. He's all about low event, solid d zone play that transitions the puck out of our end. There's literally nothing flashy or terribly exciting about his game. Like Tanev, he's not going to put up gaudy offensive numbers or wow you with physicality or energy. Gaunce doesn't put up any offensive numbers though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 23 minutes ago, Alflives said: Gaunce doesn't put up any offensive numbers though. Neither does Gudbranson, and most people don't seem to mind him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, -AJ- said: Neither does Gudbranson, and most people don't seem to mind him. True, but Gudbranson provides a physical presence that Gaunce doesn't. I would love to see Gaunce add physicality to his game. I think with his smart defensive play, and size, he could be a really valuable player. He could play PK, 5 on 5, and be a hard (heavy) to play against guy for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 29 minutes ago, Alflives said: True, but Gudbranson provides a physical presence that Gaunce doesn't. I would love to see Gaunce add physicality to his game. I think with his smart defensive play, and size, he could be a really valuable player. He could play PK, 5 on 5, and be a hard (heavy) to play against guy for sure. I would say out of three aspects, Offense, Defense, and Physicality, both players only provide one in excellence and one at an average level. Gaunce is excellent defensively and average physically while Gudbranson is excellent physically and average defensively. It'd be great if both players could turn their average area into an excellent one, or even up their offense to average. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Benning drafted Boeser 23rd OA (2016) Gillis drafted Gaunce 26th OA (2012) Benning knows how to draft. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 By now, it's pretty obvious that Green has designated roles for each of his players and he wants them to stick to the plan. Gaunce will never be the 'smash and crash' player like Dorsett or even the 'big hits' guy that Virt is supposed to be. Instead, he uses his strength along the boards; to clear the opposition players away from the high scoring areas; as well as PKs. His skating is much improved and everyone knows he has great hockey sense, which also makes him effective at defending against the better players in the league. So many people complaining about his offensive game, yet everyone knows what a dreadful line(s) he played on last year. At the moment, I don't think Green cares about the offence and simply trusts him to have him on the ice when the opposition is coming on strong. Green knows that Gaunce can score, as he proved it to him during the Utica years. That will come later on when Gaunce has linemates that are competent defensively, as well as offensively (Sutter and Dorsett are crashing the net scorers; while Gaunce really needs a playmaker to score). 4 games is way to soon to judge this young man. Canuck fans should know by now that some players take longer to develop and it would be dumb to toss him away (likely for very little) at this point. He certainly isn't hurting the team and I sure don't see any younger guys playing his defensive role as well. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garthsbutcher Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 3 hours ago, Alflives said: Gaunce doesn't put up any offensive numbers though. 4 hours ago, aGENT said: If people would just view Gaunce as a young, bottom 6 forward version of Tanev, I think they'd have far less concerns about his play. He's all about low event, solid d zone play that transitions the puck out of our end. There's literally nothing flashy or terribly exciting about his game. Like Tanev, he's not going to put up gaudy offensive numbers or wow you with physicality or energy. Tanev is a top pair shutdown dman in this league that any GM would love to have, Gaunce, NOT SO MUCH 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, garthsbutcher said: Tanev is a top pair shutdown dman in this league that any GM would love to have, Gaunce, NOT SO MUCH Hence the stipulation that: If people would just view Gaunce as a young, bottom 6 forward version of Tanev, I think they'd have far less concerns about his play. One would hope that would imply he'd see less minutes with lesser line mates and corresponding lower expectations compared to a top pair D. One would hope anyway... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey God Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Gaunce fits a role on the team in Green's eyes, therefore, he will play. Virtanen and Goldy, on the other hand, have no specific role that others (Sedins et al.) haven't already filled, therefore, they don't get to play regularly or at all. If it works, great, but if not, the question would be do we really need to sacrifice offense for defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 48 minutes ago, Hockey God said: Gaunce fits a role on the team in Green's eyes, therefore, he will play. Virtanen and Goldy, on the other hand, have no specific role that others (Sedins et al.) haven't already filled, therefore, they don't get to play regularly or at all. If it works, great, but if not, the question would be do we really need to sacrifice offense for defense? Stealth Tank? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 22 hours ago, aGENT said: Hence the stipulation that: One would hope that would imply he'd see less minutes with lesser line mates and corresponding lower expectations compared to a top pair D. One would hope anyway... Tanev can score though he's a top shutdown d man AND he can pot the odd goal. At this point Gaunce has a ways to go to put up Tanev pike offensive numbers and we have players that can contribute that are as good or better defensively. Not saying Gaunce can't get there, we just have other options available now too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 6 hours ago, canuck73_3 said: Tanev can score though he's a top shutdown d man AND he can pot the odd goal. At this point Gaunce has a ways to go to put up Tanev pike offensive numbers and we have players that can contribute that are as good or better defensively. Not saying Gaunce can't get there, we just have other options available now too. Who do you feel could replace Gaunce's defense that isn't in the lineup now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 12 minutes ago, -AJ- said: Who do you feel could replace Gaunce's defense that isn't in the lineup now? Everyone in the lineup tonight including Virtanen, defense is a very underrated part of Virtanen's play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Everyone in the lineup tonight including Virtanen, defense is a very underrated part of Virtanen's play. Sure others can play defense well, but I meant who would replace Gaunce? A Utica player? Would they have better defense and offense? Virtanen might be arguable. I haven't really looked at his numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Just now, -AJ- said: Sure others can play defense well, but I meant who would replace Gaunce? A Utica player? Would they have better defense and offense? Virtanen might be arguable. I haven't really looked at his numbers. Gaunce I'm ok with being the 13th forward at this point, it's not like I want him off the team or anything like that. I just thought Virtanen should get the nod when we need a more offensive punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Gaunce I'm ok with being the 13th forward at this point, it's not like I want him off the team or anything like that. I just thought Virtanen should get the nod when we need a more offensive punch. That's fair. It makes sense to slot Virtanen in when we need offense and slot Gaunce back in for defense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now