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

Sam Gagner | C/W


-AJ-

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, GoldenAlien said:

I think some overestimate Gagner's ability because of his draft pedigree and the fact he spent years as a top 6 forward for Edmonton.  But aside from the power play, he's basically a replacement level player.  For instance, compare his last season to Beagle's:

Beagle: 79 GP, 22pts, +3 with 12:27 TOI, 2:31 SH/G, and 58.5% FO

Gagner: 74GP, 31pts, -18 with 15:07 TOI, 2:02 PP/G, and 47.7% FO

 

On the surface, Gagner scored more than Beagle.  But Beagle plays 2.5 mins of PK per game and gets no PP time; Gagner plays 2 mins on the PP but doesn't kill penalties.  In fact, the Caps forward with the next highest PK time, Lars Ellers, averaged 1:48 SH/G - almost 45 seconds less than Beagle.  Carlson averaged 2:38 SH/G.  Edler averaged 2:41 SH/G.  Beagle basically plays as much PK as a top pairing defenseman.

 

Gagner, on the other hand, averaged as much PP time per game as Baertschi, and got 11pts as a result.  Hypothetically speaking, if he killed penalties for 2 mins a game instead of playing on the PP, he would have 20 pts in 74 games -- similar 5 on 5 production as Beagle.  Except Beagle is producing those number while playing fewer minutes, playing more PK, and taking far heavier defensive assignments 5 on 5.

 

Gagner isn't a player who can move up and down the lineup and play in the top 6.  He's a PP specialist who produces 4th line numbers 5 on 5.  Except he's a 4th liner who isn't fast or gritty, is a career 45.5% on faceoffs and -109 on +/-, and can't play PK or eat up hard minutes.  He's in some ways, remarkably similar to Hodgson -- can only succeed 5 on 5 if given favourable treatment, is talented enough to do damage on the PP, but has little else to contribute.  If Pettersson ends up struggling at C, we're actually better off with Beagle as 2C than Gagner -- he would produce similar numbers 5 on 5, but is miles ahead defensively.

 

The other issue is Gagner's not an elite PP player -- it's not like the play flows through him a la Henrik. Regardless of how Pettersson adjusts in the regular season, he's clearly a better option on the PP than Gagner.  Horvat and Boeser are locks, there has to be at least 1 D, so there's only one other spot left on PP1 -- could be a second D, or a fourth F, in which case Baertschi or Goldobin should take the spot.  That relegates Gagner to PP2, and keeping a guy that you have to shelter just so he can improve your PP2 hardly seems worth it.  If we're going to do that -- carve out protected 5 on 5 time and set aside PP time so the player can succeed -- it would make more sense to do it for Goldobin or Leipsic, or maybe Dahlen later in the season, than waste it on Gagner, who has no future on the team.

 

Gagner takes away time from guys like Goldobin and Leipsic, and possibly Gaudette or Dahlen later, because these guys need some sheltering (at least to begin with).  On the other hand, guys like Beagle, Roussel, Schaller, fill roles that the prospects can't.  Which forward prospect can win 58% of their faceoffs, eat up 2.5 mins of PK per game, and go head to head with Kopitar or Getzlaf?  How are Horvat and Pettersson going to get good matchups if Sutter is the only other defensive option down the middle? And which prospect is going to stand up for our 175lb rookie when he's on the receiving end of a bad hit?  Are we expecting Gaudette and Dahlen to provide the sandpaper if they make the team? 

 

Dorsett was overpaid too, but there was no doubt we were tougher when he's in the lineup.  With him gone, Boeser gets a bad hit and the most we can expect is some pushing and shoving.  With Pettersson in the lineup, Dahlen possibly getting a call up later, and Quinn likely coming next year, do we really want to stack our bottom 6 with the Gagners and Gaunces of the world? 

 

End of the day, this arrangement was a win-win for the Canucks -- makes room on the big team for players with actual potential, while not taking away ice time for guys like Gaudette and MacEwan on the farm.  It's obviously not a win for Gagner, but if he had to be sent down, playing at home for a highly scouted team is nicer than moving to Utica.  With two young kids, I'm sure his wife also prefers having family and friends closeby.  And whatever grumbles there are around the league, it's clear that Benning tried his best to put Gagner in a good situation, regardless of his on-ice performance, and that has to garner some goodwill.

 

 

Just excellent!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering how Gagner never improved year after year.  I mean came onto the scene as a 40 points rookie with seemingly the potential to hit PPG in his prime.  Except now he's in his prime.... and he's still maybe a 40 points guy.  You would assume that with more experience, better conditioning, etc... he should be at least a 50-60 points guy at the very least.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

I'm just wondering how Gagner never improved year after year.  I mean came onto the scene as a 40 points rookie with seemingly the potential to hit PPG in his prime.  Except now he's in his prime.... and he's still maybe a 40 points guy.  You would assume that with more experience, better conditioning, etc... he should be at least a 50-60 points guy at the very least.  

He was rushed into the NHL.  Another Oiler mess up.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2018 at 7:17 PM, GarthButcher5 said:

Whatever Friedman says about players and veterans being miffed is just sour grapes.

 

The positive message out of this is that the younger players on the team know that if the work hard and show that they want it, then they have a chance of getting a job, what better motivation than this?

He's just relaying what some agents have told him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mll said:

He's just relaying what some agents have told him. 

A bit of pot stirring. Gagner is still getting paid and could not crack a Canucks roster without the Sedins. 

 

He had a 40% decline in production after signing his deal and got beat out essentially by EP40.  He is still getting paid and is now in TO. Maybe he gets a wake up call, or retires. The game has basically passed him by. 

 

In one year no one will be talking about this. The talk will

be which FA wins a spot on EP40’s wing. 

Edited by Phat Fingers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lancaster said:

I'm just wondering how Gagner never improved year after year.  I mean came onto the scene as a 40 points rookie with seemingly the potential to hit PPG in his prime.  Except now he's in his prime.... and he's still maybe a 40 points guy.  You would assume that with more experience, better conditioning, etc... he should be at least a 50-60 points guy at the very least.  

I think we're used to guys like the Sedins, Kesler, where we don't see what their ceilings might be until their late 20s.  But many forwards actually show their ceilings by the end of their 3rd full NHL season.

 

If you look at other centres who made the NHL at 18, their first three season:

Bergeron: 39pts, 73pts (career high), 70 pts.

ROR: 26pts, 26pts, 55 pts.  He's been a 55-60 pts player since.

 

Or say, Chris Higgins, who used to play centre: 38pts, 51pts (pace), 52 pts (career high).

Mike Richards: 34 pts, 44pts (pace), 75pts (84pts pace, which would've been his career high). 

Brandon Sutter: 40pts (career high), 29pts, 32pts.

Jordan Staal: 42pts, 28pts, 49pts.  Career high: 50pts.

 

If you look at more offensive players, Backstrom got his career high in his third season (101pts).  Giroux got 93pts in his third full season -- he only ever topped that once since.  Zetterberg hit 85pts in his third season -- in the 12 seasons after, he only topped 80 pts twice (80pts & 92pts).  A lot of times, "potential" is a myth.  People point to late bloomers like the Sedins to rationalize that their 50pts forwards could become 80pts forwards, but more often than not, they're pretty much topped out by their 4th season.  They'll become more well rounded as they get older, but offensively, they won't be scoring tons more.

Edited by GoldenAlien
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2018 at 6:33 PM, GoldenAlien said:

I think some overestimate Gagner's ability because of his draft pedigree and the fact he spent years as a top 6 forward for Edmonton.  But aside from the power play, he's basically a replacement level player.  For instance, compare his last season to Beagle's:

Beagle: 79 GP, 22pts, +3 with 12:27 TOI, 2:31 SH/G, and 58.5% FO

Gagner: 74GP, 31pts, -18 with 15:07 TOI, 2:02 PP/G, and 47.7% FO

 

On the surface, Gagner scored more than Beagle.  But Beagle plays 2.5 mins of PK per game and gets no PP time; Gagner plays 2 mins on the PP but doesn't kill penalties.  In fact, the Caps forward with the next highest PK time, Lars Ellers, averaged 1:48 SH/G - almost 45 seconds less than Beagle.  Carlson averaged 2:38 SH/G.  Edler averaged 2:41 SH/G.  Beagle basically plays as much PK as a top pairing defenseman.

 

Gagner, on the other hand, averaged as much PP time per game as Baertschi, and got 11pts as a result.  Hypothetically speaking, if he killed penalties for 2 mins a game instead of playing on the PP, he would have 20 pts in 74 games -- similar 5 on 5 production as Beagle.  Except Beagle is producing those number while playing fewer minutes, playing more PK, and taking far heavier defensive assignments 5 on 5.

 

Gagner isn't a player who can move up and down the lineup and play in the top 6.  He's a PP specialist who produces 4th line numbers 5 on 5.  Except he's a 4th liner who isn't fast or gritty, is a career 45.5% on faceoffs and -109 on +/-, and can't play PK or eat up hard minutes.  He's in some ways, remarkably similar to Hodgson -- can only succeed 5 on 5 if given favourable treatment, is talented enough to do damage on the PP, but has little else to contribute.  If Pettersson ends up struggling at C, we're actually better off with Beagle as 2C than Gagner -- he would produce similar numbers 5 on 5, but is miles ahead defensively.

 

The other issue is Gagner's not an elite PP player -- it's not like the play flows through him a la Henrik. Regardless of how Pettersson adjusts in the regular season, he's clearly a better option on the PP than Gagner.  Horvat and Boeser are locks, there has to be at least 1 D, so there's only one other spot left on PP1 -- could be a second D, or a fourth F, in which case Baertschi or Goldobin should take the spot.  That relegates Gagner to PP2, and keeping a guy that you have to shelter just so he can improve your PP2 hardly seems worth it.  If we're going to do that -- carve out protected 5 on 5 time and set aside PP time so the player can succeed -- it would make more sense to do it for Goldobin or Leipsic, or maybe Dahlen later in the season, than waste it on Gagner, who has no future on the team.

 

Gagner takes away time from guys like Goldobin and Leipsic, and possibly Gaudette or Dahlen later, because these guys need some sheltering (at least to begin with).  On the other hand, guys like Beagle, Roussel, Schaller, fill roles that the prospects can't.  Which forward prospect can win 58% of their faceoffs, eat up 2.5 mins of PK per game, and go head to head with Kopitar or Getzlaf?  How are Horvat and Pettersson going to get good matchups if Sutter is the only other defensive option down the middle? And which prospect is going to stand up for our 175lb rookie when he's on the receiving end of a bad hit?  Are we expecting Gaudette and Dahlen to provide the sandpaper if they make the team? 

 

Dorsett was overpaid too, but there was no doubt we were tougher when he's in the lineup.  With him gone, Boeser gets a bad hit and the most we can expect is some pushing and shoving.  With Pettersson in the lineup, Dahlen possibly getting a call up later, and Quinn likely coming next year, do we really want to stack our bottom 6 with the Gagners and Gaunces of the world? 

 

End of the day, this arrangement was a win-win for the Canucks -- makes room on the big team for players with actual potential, while not taking away ice time for guys like Gaudette and MacEwan on the farm.  It's obviously not a win for Gagner, but if he had to be sent down, playing at home for a highly scouted team is nicer than moving to Utica.  With two young kids, I'm sure his wife also prefers having family and friends closeby.  And whatever grumbles there are around the league, it's clear that Benning tried his best to put Gagner in a good situation, regardless of his on-ice performance, and that has to garner some goodwill.

 

 

Honestly the best post I've read on CDC in years

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took a stroll over to the Leafs/Marlies forum to see what they are saying about Sam Gagner.  They really should be sending Benning a thank you card for helping to develop their young wingers.  Here are a few quotes.

 

"I really LOVE the addition of Gagner. I think this will do wonders for our skill wingers like Bracco. Gagner may take some flak for his NHL play but he is going to be beyond elite in the AHL"

"Hoping it's Bracco and Grundstrom centred by Gagner."

"Its official... Ohhhh man!!! Imagine one or two of Grundstrom/Bracco/Engvall/Timashov/Moore on Gagner's wing!?!"

"Would not mind seeing Bracco and Grundstrom strapped to Gagner's wings. Could do wonders for them playing with an NHL centre. Would be good for development."

"Gagner's a huge addition to bolster the Marlies' C depth. Some of our highly skilled wingers will benefit significantly by playing with him. "

 

Ummmm Jim Benning - Jonathon Dahlen, Kole Lind, Lukas Jasek, Petrus Palmu and Jonah Gadjovich all say hi!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, UticaHockey said:

Sorry but I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions by Vancouver's management.  Feel free to block me if you wish.

I’m sure Benning’s aware that’s Gagner would be a huge boon to the prospects on the farm and the Comets as a team. You’re not offering up any new insight here. He did it out of respect to Sam. It’s unfortunate that the team most suited to Sam’s needs happens to be Toronto but Benning is doing the good guy thing here. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, UticaHockey said:

Sorry but I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions by Vancouver's management.  Feel free to block me if you wish.

Maybe it's a good decision, because JB was taking into consideration Gagner's NHL resume, and he signed him to a 3 year contract (with two remaining).  Given those circumstances I think allowing Sam to play closer to his home was important.  It will set the table for future FA's coming here too.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, UticaHockey said:

Sorry but I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions by Vancouver's management.  Feel free to block me if you wish.

 

4 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I’m sure Benning’s aware that’s Gagner would be a huge boon to the prospects on the farm and the Comets as a team. You’re not offering up any new insight here. He did it out of respect to Sam. It’s unfortunate that the team most suited to Sam’s needs happens to be Toronto but Benning is doing the good guy thing here. 

Over the years, the words 'it's a business' have been well used, and rightly so. It is a business. This does not seem like a good business decision. The question that needs answering is, 'what's the rest of the story ?'. If there is no 'rest of the story', colour me confused !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, UticaHockey said:

Sorry but I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions by Vancouver's management.  Feel free to block me if you wish.

Of course Marlies fans would be delighted.  Just like Comets fans would love Gagner too.  That doesn't mean it's the best move for the Canucks, and that's what should be the primary concern for Vancouver's management.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marlies fans are delighted because they drink the same koolaid (which by it's yellow color, should be investigated further) and buy any and every overestimation and exaggeration that's served to them.

 

This is a directive passed down from the Leafs, who have also tried selling their "faithful" on the idea that the team is a legitimate Stanley Cup contender, even though they have a porous defense, literally no players who have a physical edge to their play (outside of a cowardly Kadri), and are using the media to send a message of acceptance of lowballing contracts to their players.

 

Gagner is a vanilla player whose only really discernible trait is that he's been in the league for a while. He's a middling player at best, who's marginal skillset relegated him to the waiver wire. He is literally the meaning of average in the world of hockey.

 

Certainly Benning could have made him report to Utica, but Benning decided to honor what I assume to be a request from Gagner to be loaned to the Marlies, so that he could be close to home. Benning didn't need to do that but he did the honorable thing. And really, if Benning thought that Gagner was such an elite AHL player as many of the starry eyed Marlies fans think, he would have kept him in Utica to help the kids. He didn't. End of story.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

 

Over the years, the words 'it's a business' have been well used, and rightly so. It is a business. This does not seem like a good business decision. The question that needs answering is, 'what's the rest of the story ?'. If there is no 'rest of the story', colour me confused !

Yes it is a business and it's up to Jim Benning to make the right business decision to help the Canucks especially in the middle of a rebuild. IMO that decision should be to have Gagner centering a line with two prospects on his wings instead of playing against them. Gagner is making big money this year and is obligated to do what is in the best interest of the organization that is signing his paycheck. If the best interest of the Canucks is for Gagner to be helping develop a couple prospects then that is exactly what he should be doing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, UticaHockey said:

Yes it is a business and it's up to Jim Benning to make the right business decision to help the Canucks especially in the middle of a rebuild. IMO that decision should be to have Gagner centering a line with two prospects on his wings instead of playing against them. Gagner is making big money this year and is obligated to do what is in the best interest of the organization that is signing his paycheck. If the best interest of the Canucks is for Gagner to be helping develop a couple prospects then that is exactly what he should be doing.

having a miserable, resentful gagner poisoning the well of youth with his bitterness because he's stuck playing somewhere he has no desire to be is not in the best interests of the organization. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
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...