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

[Waivers] Zalewski, Pedan, Megna, Chaput


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Erik Karlsson said:

 

Yeah Biega's on the team so he can be exposed for the expansion draft. Rule is you have to play 70 games combined from this season and last. He has to play 19 more games since he played 51 last year. Otherwise if Sbisa had a season ending injury or we traded him we'd have to expose one of Hutton, Gudbranson, Edler or Tanev. 

 

Technically Hutton can't be exposed because he is second year of pro.

 

So just the three above or you have to trade/sign a guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Time Lord said:

By that logic, a classic Benning homer would have to like Pedan because Benning spent a 3rd on him

 

I'm not a homer. I never liked Pedan. I don't consider waiving Pedan a good or bad move, it's just the kind of move that every team makes. Waiving Pedan means about as much as waiving Megna to me

You may have never liked Pedan, but it's not like people here on CDC are talking about Pedan like he's a god or something. I liked him about as much as I like what we could have done with that 3rd round pick, maybe a little more. Pedan has potential but it's unrealized at this point. Does he become a gritty depth guy, or can he step it up further and contribute in a number of areas vs just being a big body?

 

2 hours ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

Agreed.

Agreed.

 

Because of what Biega did last year, his pre-season performance is less important.  The thing that some fans didn't notice were the match-ups, where Biega has played way above his head and looked better than he should.  I honestly think that other teams have noticed that, and solid D are a big deal.  And 8th D that aren't a controversy are valuable.  He's the perfect coach's guy and team player and plug made good.  The thing about Pedan is that they probably think he'll clear, he's not in a position to make a difference, but has to be brought along, and he may benefit from playing a leading role on what looks to be a decent team.  I honestly think that he'll clear and that Biega would be at a slightly higher risk.

 

Also, I hadn't considered the possibility that they are keen to trade Sbisa, because I doubt they are, though it makes a little more sense now that we've seen what we have.  But if they are, then an expansion consideration does make more sense here.

I doubt they're keen to trade Sbisa (or anyone else) but there has to be something. I mean, looking at keeping Stecher and Larsen is redundant and doesn't help our D from a pairing or functional standpoint.

 

But I agree Biega has earned some respect, and it shows with his contract. I don't necessarily agree that makes him more likely to be claimed on waivers by teams when Pedan carries more future potential without having a significant drop in current play. As you say, Biega looks better than he should, where Pedan doesn't look as good as we're hoping. They each have their pros and cons but Pedan's future potential should be more valuable to us and to most other teams at this point.

 

It basically comes down to a contending team that lacks roster depth valuing Biega more over the potential of Pedan which more teams could afford in their roster because of his size at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Provost said:

 

I think that is really an overblown idea.

 

It is absolutely easy to trade for another fringe player before the expansion draft if we get into that situation.... it would cost us basically nothing.

 

Pedan got sent down for hockey reasons, they don't need another big physical guy on the roster.  Gudbranson, Sbisa, and Tryamkin fill those roles and are better... Tryamkin isn't even a lock to be on the opening day roster and could do a stint in the AHL to log big minutes.  We have three smaller and faster guys in Larsen, Stecher, and Biega remaining and only two (possibly even one) of them will be on the opening day roster.

 

There is even a scenario where the organization changes strategies a little and only keeps 7 D up in the short term and carry two extra forwards.  Tryamkin and Stecher sent down to be a top pairing in Utica.  Then signing either one or even both PTO guys who have impressed.  I think there is really more worry and tension about the forward situation right now as there is no worry for sending a couple extra D down because everyone (including the players) know that it won't take long for them to come back up with injuries or someone else like Larsen or Sbisa falling flat.

 

It is not impossible to see an opening night roster of

 

Sedin-Sedin-Erikson

Baertschi-Horvat-Rodin

Granlund-Sutter-Hansen

Burrows-Ruutu-Dorsett

Skille-Gaunce

 

Edler-Tanev

Hutton-Gudbranson

Sbisa-Larsen

Biega

 

That gives you two very good PK units in Sutter/Hansen and Ruutu/Burrows, leaving the top two lines to get all the offensive starts.

 

Larsen gets half a dozen games to see how he manages a PP, but is on a short leash.

 

The PTO guys are no risk and add organizational depth, you sign them for league minimum (cheaper than the young kids ironically enough)... and if they fall off, you waive them and they get picked up, report to the minors. get loaned to a European league, or retire.  Meanwhile the kids have gotten prime development minutes in Utica rather than limited bottom line minutes in the NHL.

We can easily punt the football down the field and not have to make the real decisions until well into the season.

I dunno... Am I the only one looking at these rosters and thinking" Bottom 5 team".  5 years ago this may have been good, but I feel that our "senior citizens" will fade after a hot start. Put that together with really only having Tanev, Hutton and Gudbranson as being capable of playing on the defensive side of the puck.... Well I'd have to think that we're going to have an exciting draft in 17. Unless Miller finds a way to steal some games, because we all know that markstrom can't.

     I hope we turn the corner of this rebuild in the next 2-3 seasons and get back in to the upswing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Of course he cleared.  Just another classic example of Canuck's fans over valuing their players.  B)

like the eastern bias that we see all the time ,I'm  sure there was teams back east that didn't know enough about him ,as well there was probably an equal amount of interest ,but coundnt act because of trimming their own roster ,it was an opportune time to pull this gamble off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, stonecoldstevebernier said:

I like Pedan, but who do you want sitting in the press box for 20 straight games, him or Biega? Because if he was the 8th guy he sure wouldn't be playing very much. The way I see it, Pedan has the potential to be a good NHL player while Biega's already maxed his potential as a reliable depth defenseman. Let Pedan get big minutes in Utica and Biega can be a dependable fill-in with the big club when necessary.

Of course, it still remains to be seen if Biega is even kept himself. If they decide on keeping Stecher up then somebody else is leaving.

I agree - and he's their #5 LHD  right now - in tough and it's not likely to get easier with Juolevi growing into the mix.

Edler

Hutton

Sbisa

Tyramkin.

 

He needed to improve his mobility (not simply speed) and he appears to have, but let him continue to work on and develop with big AHL minutes.

He's big, he's tough, he's fast, he has a great shot - great potential - needs to get quicker - but it's nice to have him in the system still - and it was good timing - teams don't really have spots open.   He will help Utica a lot, nice to have for injury depth, and he could still force his way into the lineup in due course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

surprised. does he require waivers to come up to the big club? 

He does not need to clear waivers to come back up, but if he plays 10 games, he would need to clear waivers to be sent back

 

"If a player cleared waivers and is subsequently recalled during the same year, he does not have to clear waivers again unless he has either played 10 or more NHL games or has spent 30 or more days on an NHL roster since last clearing. Otherwise, he will have to re-clear waivers to be assigned."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mackcanuck said:

 

"If a player cleared waivers and is subsequently recalled during the same year, he does not have to clear waivers again unless he has either played 10 or more NHL games or has spent 30 or more days on an NHL roster since last clearing. Otherwise, he will have to re-clear waivers to be assigned."

 

I think he is asking about re-entry waivers which don't apply anymore

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...