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

Jonathan Dahlén | C/LW


Mathew Barzal

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

Definitely hoping Dahlen plays in Utica.  I'm sure it would be better for his development and we desperately need some skill down there, not to mention another player who is actually worth tracking.

 

I'm getting bored of tracking the Grenier's, Zalewski's and Darren Archibald"s of the world.  

 

Virtanen, Brisebois, Palmu, Dahlen please. 

I would like him to play in Utica as well. But him playing with petterson in the SHL isn't a bad option either. Of like them both in Utica TBH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

Definitely hoping Dahlen plays in Utica.  I'm sure it would be better for his development and we desperately need some skill down there, not to mention another player who is actually worth tracking.

 

I'm getting bored of tracking the Grenier's, Zalewski's and Darren Archibald"s of the world.  

 

Virtanen, Brisebois, Palmu, Dahlen please. 

 

1 hour ago, RetroCanuck said:

And Boeser, Labate, Molino, MacEwen as well please

 

We sign 2-3 of Gagner, Weal, Boucher, Rodin etc and Utica might actually have some decent skill this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

 

We sign 2-3 of Gagner, Weal, Boucher, Rodin etc and Utica might actually have some decent skill this year.

What do you think Gagner's value is right now? I was a big advocate for pursuing him last year when he was undervalued. But right now he's coming off career highs and could be overvalued. Just curious where you'd cap a maximum on any offer, both on term and AAV?

 

Personally, I'd be ok with paying somewhat inflated market value so long as the term is short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

What do you think Gagner's value is right now? I was a big advocate for pursuing him last year when he was undervalued. But right now he's coming off career highs and could be overvalued. Just curious where you'd cap a maximum on any offer, both on term and AAV?

 

Personally, I'd be ok with paying somewhat inflated market value so long as the term is short.

Yeah, would have loved to grab him last year too... <_<

 

I'd probably do 3 years, 4 maybe.

 

At 3 years, I'd probably like to stay at/under $4m. 4 years, $3.5'ish. If we could get him for 2 years (doubtful IMO), I'd consider even a bit more.

 

Depends on what other teams are willing to offer though.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Yeah, would have loved to grab him last year too... <_<

 

I'd probably do 3 years, 4 maybe.

 

At 3 years, I'd probably like to stay at/under $4m. 4 years, $3.5'ish. If we could get him for 2 years (doubtful IMO), I'd consider even a bit more.

 

Depends on what other teams are willing to offer though.

Eww....

 

Why do we want that?  by this time next year all he will be doing is taking up power play time from one of are young kids.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Eww....

 

Why do we want that?  by this time next year all he will be doing is taking up power play time from one of are young kids.  

Hank retires and we're left with Horvat/Sutter as our 1 and 2 C's until Petterson is ready (if he ever is). That's why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Hank retires and we're left with Horvat/Sutter as our 1 and 2 C's until Petterson is ready (if he ever is). That's why.

Gagner isn't a great center.  In CBJ he was able to take a few draws but quickly transitioned back the wing since he is poor defensively.  Torts utilized him well, he knew his strengths and weaknesses and only used him to his strengths.  With all the rookies we will be bringing into the line up the last thing we need is another players you have to shelter.

 

and that's if hank retires.  All indications it sounds like they will be back for a couple more years

Edited by ForsbergTheGreat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Gagner isn't a great center.  In CBJ he was able to take a few draws but quickly transitioned back the wing since he is poor defensively.  Torts utilized him well, he knew his strengths and weaknesses and only used him to his strengths.  With all the rookies we will be bringing into the line up the last thing we need is another players you have to shelter.

 

 

Did I say he was?

 

Ozone starts, PP time, producing offense. We're going to need that guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jiggs50 said:

Could Dahlen be a little overrated cause he played with Pettersson? 

 

Haven't look into the stats or anything. Was just wondering

Someone posted fancy stats that showed Dahlen and Pettersson were both equally responsible for the vast majority of their team's scoring.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Did I say he was?

 

Ozone starts, PP time, producing offense. We're going to need that guy.

We do? We have zero need for Gagner. His type of skill set is not a need,  not for 3-4 years. Our biggest strength in our young players pool is that type of player.

 

Gagner as a 1 year stop gap to not rush the kids...Sure that could work.  3-4 years is ludicrous...

 

You're getting too focus on numbers and forgetting context.  Ask your self Do you think us missing a player like gagner is the reason our PP sucks? Or is there a bigger issue around the PP....like say a PMD?......or a accurate Right handed shot?

 

What does Gagner bring that Hank doesn't?  I'd rather extend Hank for a few more years that count on gagner.

Edited by ForsbergTheGreat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

We do? We have zero need for Gagner. His type of skill set is not a need,  not for 3-4 years. Our biggest strength in our young players pool is that type of player.

 

Gagner as a 1 year stop gap to not rush the kids...Sure that could work.  3-4 years is ludicrous...

 

You're getting too focus on numbers and forgetting context.  Ask your self Do you think us missing a player like gagner is the reason our PP sucks? Or is there a bigger issue around the PP....like say a PMD?......or a accurate Right handed shot?

 

 

 

 

None of our potential C's are going to be ready for 2+ years minimum. So yeah, we do.

 

PMD is the biggest thing our PP is missing, absolutely. Doesn't mean Gagner wouldn't help it (along with RH'd shot, Boeser).

 

Clearly I'd prefer a 1-3 year deal but contenders will probably be offering him 1-2 year deals which means we'd likely need to up term (2-4 years) to even have a shot at him. 

 

Worst case you trade him after 2-3 years or waive him/buy him out if he's horrible. You worry too much.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, J.R. said:

None of our potential C's are going to be ready for 2+ years minimum. So yeah, we do.

 

PMD is the biggest thing our PP is missing, absolutely. Doesn't mean Gagner wouldn't help it (along with RH'd shot, Boeser).

 

Clearly I'd prefer a 1-3 year deal but contenders will probably be offering him 1-2 year deals which means we'd likely need to up term (2-4 years) to even have a shot at him. 

 

Worst case you trade him after 2-3 years or waive him/buy him out if he's horrible. You worry too much.

problem is Gagner is dead weight 5v5.  this team is going to be bad probably, I don't see him having anything close to the season he had with CBJ, here.  I'd much rather try the Jordan Weal experiment on a short term deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wshdrvvn said:

problem is Gagner is dead weight 5v5.  this team is going to be bad probably, I don't see him having anything close to the season he had with CBJ, here.  I'd much rather try the Jordan Weal experiment on a short term deal.

Put him in a sheltered, offensive, ozone, PP role. Flip him in 2-3 years when our guys start showing up.

 

I'd take a flyer on Weal too. Both cheap, 'free' assets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, J.R. said:

None of our potential C's are going to be ready for 2+ years minimum. So yeah, we do.

And when Hank is still around for another 2 years after this year what's the rush?,  Either way if Hank does retire, this team will need a 2c stop gap, not a 4c stop gap that players sheltered offensive minutes. 

 

Just now, J.R. said:

PMD is the biggest thing our PP is missing, absolutely. Doesn't mean Gagner wouldn't help it (along with RH'd shot, Boeser).

 

He doesn't bring anything this team doesn't already have.  If Granlund or Baertschi played on a PP unit with Werenski/Jones on the back end and Jenner/Hartnell in front. they'd also have 50 point season last year.

 

Sedin, sedin, Horvat, Baerschi, Granlund, Eriksson fill out the top 6 for the PP units.  Add in Boeser, Goldy, Sutter, and even Rodin.  I don't see where gagner's sheltered ice time comes from or who gets demoted in lieu of.  I'd radther fill the need from all the young potential we have within than signing a one dimensional to a 4 year $3+ million contract.  Yuck.  

 

 

Just now, J.R. said:

Clearly I'd prefer a 1-3 year deal but contenders will probably be offering him 1-2 year deals which means we'd likely need to up term (2-4 years) to even have a shot at him. 

 

Worst case you trade him after 2-3 years or waive him/buy him out if he's horrible. You worry too much.

No, i just plan things out better....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And when Hank is still around for another 2 years after this year what's the rush?,  Either way if Hank does retire, this team will need a 2c stop gap, not a 4c stop gap that players sheltered offensive minutes. 

 

 

He doesn't bring anything this team doesn't already have.  If Granlund or Baertschi played on a PP unit with Werenski/Jones on the back end and Jenner/Hartnell in front. they'd also have 50 point season last year.

 

Sedin, sedin, Horvat, Baerschi, Granlund, Eriksson fill out the top 6 for the PP units.  Add in Boeser, Goldy, Sutter, and even Rodin.  I don't see where gagner's sheltered ice time comes from or who gets demoted in lieu of.  I'd radther fill the need from all the young potential we have within than signing a one dimensional to a 4 year $3+ million contract.  Yuck.  

 

 

No, i just plan things out better....

Who says Hank is around for 2 more years? I don't think management will plan on that being the case and would prefer a contingency plan in place. We went to the cup final with Hank getting sheltered offensive opportunities FWIW.

 

His ice time probably comes from some of those guys playing in Utica ;)

 

Hey, if we can get him on a 1-3 year deal, great. Don't see it happening though and don't see 3-4 year as a problem. Less ideal? Sure. Problem? nope.

 

Baer gets traded this coming year IMO.

Edited by J.R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Who says Hank is around for 2 more years? I don't think management will plan on that being the case and would prefer a contingency plan in place. We went to the cup final with Hank getting sheltered offensive opportunities FWIW.

Who say's Hank wont return?  All indications are they will be back.  Gagner isn't a contingency plan and Gagner can only have wet dreams about putting up 100+ point season.    So stating canucks got the finals giving hank sheltered minutes is moot. 

 

Quote

His ice time probably comes from some of those guys playing in Utica

 

A team doesn't have the ability to shelter 1/4 of your roster.  We are a team that transitioning into younger players.  These younger players are the ones that need to be eased in,  If were going to bring in anyone it's players that can handle the hard ice time so that the kids don't thrown to the wolves.

 

Quote

Hey, if we can get him on a 1-3 year deal, great. Don't see it happening though and don't see 3-4 year as a problem. Less ideal? Sure. Problem? nope.

It is a problem if you have a player getting 3-4 mill a year locked up for another 3 years.  It's a waste of cap and roster space. 

 

Quote

Baer gets traded this coming year IMO.

The reason Baer could get traded is because it would open up space for our young players knocking at the door  All gagner does is take up that space.  Makes zero sense.  We should not sign any player for more than a 2 year stop gap, preferable one year.

Edited by ForsbergTheGreat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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