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

[Discussion] As Armchair GM, I'm Curious...


Recommended Posts

If, like Cher, you could turn back time and find the way to (re)assemble the 2016-2017 edition of the home team with current and former Canucks (still in the league) - regardless of the cap - what would your depth chart look like? Only restriction; you can't include players who were traded for one another (i.e. Kesler and Bonino/Sbisa, Bonino and Sutter, Granlund and Shinkaruk, etc. You get the idea). Also, keep in mind that you're not assembling an all-time Canuck team. Meaning, the Burrows you select for THIS year's team isn't the Burrows you're remembering from 6 years ago, but, rather, the current model.

 

Ready?

 

 

1C - Ryan Kesler

-Which, in turn, would mean no Nick Bonino option for 3C.

 

2C - Henrik Sedin

-The Twins have been saying they're hopeful the team already has someone in place to supplant them from the top line when they retire. Doesn't look promising at the moment. Kesler was the most promising of the lot, though.

 

3C - Jannik Hansen.

-Yes, I'm serious. Remember, before he was slotted-in at his current RW, AV had him at the center position. Think of the Kings Trevor Lewis for a similar comparison.

 

4C - Brad Richardson

-See G1A as to why you don't see Horvat's name here. 

 

 

 

LW1 - Michael Grabner

-Every so often he has "one of those years". So far, this is shaping up to be one of those years.

 

LW2 - Daniel Sedin

 

LW3 - This is a tough one for me. Either Swen Baertschi or Alexandre Burrows.

-Burrows obviously isn't the same dragon slayer he used to be, but, have we really seen enough from Baertschi to supplant him here?

 

LW4 - My first choice would be Tanner Glass. Yes, really. Unfortunately, he's been disqualified for currently playing in the AHL. Who else am I missing off-hand? Maybe Burrows slots-in here?

 

 

 

RW1 - Radim Vrbata

-Just make sure Willie's not coaching him. Done.

 

RW2 - Loui Eriksson

-Let's just hope that this team has someone competent who can feed him the puck once the twins are gone. If not? It (that contract, I mean) could look REALLY ugly at that point.

 

RW3 - Dale Weise

-Remember when during his final season as a Canuck he said all he needed was a chance to show that he's more than just a 4th liner? When he got shipped to MTL, it turns out he wasn't joking.

 

RW4 - Zack Kassian

-Really wasn't a fan at all while he was here. But, I think he's well on his way to redeeming himself now with EDM. Maybe it was GMMG's initial top-6 projection for the guy that put me off, I don't know. But, he's clearly found his role with the Coilers. Gave him away for nothing, though. 

 

 

LD1 - Alex Edler

 

LD2 - Jason Garrison

 

LD3 - Dan Hamhuis

 

LD4 - Nikita Tryamkin

 

 

RD1 - Chris Tanev

-Holding my nose on this one. But, it's slim pickin's otherwise. 

 

RD2 - Erik Gudbranson

 

RD3 - Kevin Bieksa

 

RD4 - Frank Corrado or Troy Stetcher

-Really, have we seen enough of either to make a definitive decision? Unless, you'd prefer Yannik Weber.

 

 

G1 - Roberto Luongo

Nothing else to say.

 

G1A - Cory Schneider

 

 

What do you think? Who have I missed, while keeping can't-use-players-traded-for-one-another in mind?

 

Lastly, this is actually my first ever created thread. I get that tags are required, but, I don't see that option on my screen. But, I at least made the effort. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fakename70 said:

If, like Cher, you could turn back time and find the way to (re)assemble the 2016-2017 edition of the home team with current and former Canucks (still in the league) - regardless of the cap - what would your depth chart look like? Only restriction; you can't include players who were traded for one another (i.e. Kesler and Bonino/Sbisa, Bonino and Sutter, Granlund and Shinkaruk, etc. You get the idea). Also, keep in mind that you're not assembling an all-time Canuck team. Meaning, the Burrows you select for THIS year's team isn't the Burrows you're remembering from 6 years ago, but, rather, the current model.

 

Ready?

 

 

1C - Ryan Kesler

-Which, in turn, would mean no Nick Bonino option for 3C.

 

2C - Henrik Sedin

-The Twins have been saying they're hopeful the team already has someone in place to supplant them from the top line when they retire. Doesn't look promising at the moment. Kesler was the most promising of the lot, though.

 

3C - Jannik Hansen.

-Yes, I'm serious. Remember, before he was slotted-in at his current RW, AV had him at the center position. Think of the Kings Trevor Lewis for a similar comparison.

 

4C - Brad Richardson

-See G1A as to why you don't see Horvat's name here. 

 

 

 

LW1 - Michael Grabner

-Every so often he has "one of those years". So far, this is shaping up to be one of those years.

 

LW2 - Daniel Sedin

 

LW3 - This is a tough one for me. Either Swen Baertschi or Alexandre Burrows.

-Burrows obviously isn't the same dragon slayer he used to be, but, have we really seen enough from Baertschi to supplant him here?

 

LW4 - My first choice would be Tanner Glass. Yes, really. Unfortunately, he's been disqualified for currently playing in the AHL. Who else am I missing off-hand? Maybe Burrows slots-in here?

 

 

 

RW1 - Radim Vrbata

-Just make sure Willie's not coaching him. Done.

 

RW2 - Loui Eriksson

-Let's just hope that this team has someone competent who can feed him the puck once the twins are gone. If not? It (that contract, I mean) could look REALLY ugly at that point.

 

RW3 - Dale Weise

-Remember when during his final season as a Canuck he said all he needed was a chance to show that he's more than just a 4th liner? When he got shipped to MTL, it turns out he wasn't joking.

 

RW4 - Zack Kassian

-Really wasn't a fan at all while he was here. But, I think he's well on his way to redeeming himself now with EDM. Maybe it was GMMG's initial top-6 projection for the guy that put me off, I don't know. But, he's clearly found his role with the Coilers. Gave him away for nothing, though. 

 

 

LD1 - Alex Edler

 

LD2 - Jason Garrison

 

LD3 - Dan Hamhuis

 

LD4 - Nikita Tryamkin

 

 

RD1 - Chris Tanev

-Holding my nose on this one. But, it's slim pickin's otherwise. 

 

RD2 - Erik Gudbranson

 

RD3 - Kevin Bieksa

 

RD4 - Frank Corrado or Troy Stetcher

-Really, have we seen enough of either to make a definitive decision? Unless, you'd prefer Yannik Weber.

 

 

G1 - Roberto Luongo

Nothing else to say.

 

G1A - Cory Schneider

 

 

What do you think? Who have I missed, while keeping can't-use-players-traded-for-one-another in mind?

 

Lastly, this is actually my first ever created thread. I get that tags are required, but, I don't see that option on my screen. But, I at least made the effort. 

Wow!  That was a long post.  You must have plenty of free time, or you're a kid stuck in Math class.:lol:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Wow!  That was a long post.  You must have plenty of free time, or you're a kid stuck in Math class.:lol:

 

I know you are probably (hopefully..) joking, but my point will remain the same. All you see on message boards is people criticizing people for not having well thought-out posts/replies, but when someone actually takes the time to have a well thought-out post... Well I bet you've already guessed it. We criticize him for not having a life or having a boring one! Lol. 

#humans

 

Back on track, that is a pretty cool and creative idea. Turning back the clock and declining some of the trades and seeing how the team would have shaped up is a cool idea. I wish if we at least sucked we could have guys like Bieksa and Lou around to help morale and keep things interesting in the dressing room and social media wise... lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hansen as a C? You said reassemble the 2016/17 team, then you included Kesler, Luongo, Bieksa, Hamhuis etc. Time to let go of 2010/11.

 

What I'd do:

 

In 2008, draft Erik Karlsson at #10 rather than Cody Hodgson.

In 2009, draft Marcus Johansson at #22 rather than Jordan Schroeder.

 

That is all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Fakename70 said:

RD1 - Chris Tanev

-Holding my nose on this one. But, it's slim pickin's otherwise. 

 

RD2 - Erik Gudbranson

 

RD3 - Kevin Bieksa

 

RD4 - Frank Corrado or Troy Stetcher

-Really, have we seen enough of either to make a definitive decision? Unless, you'd prefer Yannik Weber.

 

Pretty good, only thing is you probably wouldn't have Gud in the lineup.  We traded McCann for him, who was the pick we got in return for Kesler was he not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, canuck204 said:

I know you are probably (hopefully..) joking, but my point will remain the same. All you see on message boards is people criticizing people for not having well thought-out posts/replies, but when someone actually takes the time to have a well thought-out post... Well I bet you've already guessed it. We criticize him for not having a life or having a boring one! Lol. 

#humans

 

Back on track, that is a pretty cool and creative idea. Turning back the clock and declining some of the trades and seeing how the team would have shaped up is a cool idea. I wish if we at least sucked we could have guys like Bieksa and Lou around to help morale and keep things interesting in the dressing room and social media wise... lol.

 

LOL... can't disagree more with you on everything you wrote. His post is just lengthy... You can display a lineup in a far more compact way than he did... Half of the players he listed he had no comment for. You could easily do a lineup, like EVERYONE else does on this site, and go,

 

#1: LW - C - RW

#2: LW - C - RW

#3: LW - C - RW

#4: LW - C - RW

 

#1: LD - RD

#2: LD - RD

#3: LD - RD

 

G1

G2

 

You take up FAR less space than what he did in displaying a lineup. And comments can go below.... Not to mention that his post wasn't well thought out at all to be honest. I mean that team is CLEARLY extremely far over the cap... Also, what is so interesting about using hindsight to pick an optimal route through our good and bad trades? That's like the most boring thing I could imagine to do pertaining to a hockey team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniel Sedin - Henrik Sedin - Jannik Hansen

Michael Grabner - Brandon Sutter - Loui Eriksson

Sven Baertschi - Bo Horvat - Radim Vrbata

Alex Burrows - Max Lappiere - Derek Dorsett

 

Alex Edler - Chris Tanev

Dan Hamhuis - Troy Stecher

Ben Hutton - Jason Garrison

Nikita Tryamkin - Christian Ehrhoff

 

Roberto Luongo

Eddie Lack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

Hansen as a C? You said reassemble the 2016/17 team, then you included Kesler, Luongo, Bieksa, Hamhuis etc. Time to let go of 2010/11.

 

What I'd do:

 

In 2008, draft Erik Karlsson at #10 rather than Cody Hodgson.

In 2009, draft Marcus Johansson at #22 rather than Jordan Schroeder.

 

That is all.

 

 

I wasn't thinking at all about holding onto 2011. Never even crossed my brain. But, given the choice between Kesler vs Bonino/Sbisa/Sutter...

 

If you can show me how whomever the Canucks received for Luongo is progressing, I'll certainly be open to reconsidering. But, unless I'm wrong, he wasn't traded for anyone on the current roster. Same goes for Bieksa, as far as I'm aware. But, maybe you'd prefer Biega, I don't know. 

 

Lastly, you misunderstood the rules: only current and former Canucks were eligible. That eliminates both Johansson and Karlsson from consideration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Aircool said:

 

LOL... can't disagree more with you on everything you wrote. His post is just lengthy... You can display a lineup in a far more compact way than he did... Half of the players he listed he had no comment for. You could easily do a lineup, like EVERYONE else does on this site, and go,

 

#1: LW - C - RW

#2: LW - C - RW

#3: LW - C - RW

#4: LW - C - RW

 

#1: LD - RD

#2: LD - RD

#3: LD - RD

 

G1

G2

 

You take up FAR less space than what he did in displaying a lineup. And comments can go below.... Not to mention that his post wasn't well thought out at all to be honest. I mean that team is CLEARLY extremely far over the cap... Also, what is so interesting about using hindsight to pick an optimal route through our good and bad trades? That's like the most boring thing I could imagine to do pertaining to a hockey team.

Was a comment absolutely necessary for Kevin Bieksa, Daniel Sedin, Alex Edler or Nikita Tryamkin? What should I have said then, hmm? You're certainly welcomed to create your own similar yet far less wordy thread if you like. You already suggested as much anyway. 

 

And, if you're going to complain about how wordy it is, you should at least have paid attention to what you're complaining about. I clearly stated up front that the cap was being ignored for this particular exercise. Yet, there you are complaining that my proposal isn't cap feasible. 

(Rolls eyes)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Fakename70 said:

Was a comment absolutely necessary for Kevin Bieksa, Daniel Sedin, Alex Edler or Nikita Tryamkin? What should I have said then, hmm? You're certainly welcomed to create your own similar yet far less wordy thread if you like. You already suggested as much anyway. 

 

And, if you're going to complain about how wordy it is, you should at least have paid attention to what you're complaining about. I clearly stated up front that the cap was being ignored for this particular exercise. Yet, there you are complaining that my proposal isn't cap feasible. 

(Rolls eyes)

 

I'm not saying you didn't have to comment, I was saying that the structure of your post was horrific. Either way, that post wasn't addressed to you. It was addressed to someone who was defending the length of your post, and even went so far as to say that it was interesting. I just informed him that I thought the length was avoidable, and that it's not a particularly interesting exercise to use hindsight to evaluate trades and construct an optimal team with no consideration for the salary cap. That's incredibly boring, and doesn't take much more intelligence than a monkey.

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...