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

[Discussion] Starting line-up and Waiver Concerns


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I don't see many teams doing the 4th line development route. Most teams try to develop players where they see fit in the long term through their farm system as that is the purpose of it and like you say, the more elite ones will get the opportunity to develop on the NHL teams in the roles they are suited for.

Benning's comments leave that unclear, he talks of "roles", not sure how much he will have to do with game management.

 

IMO, since these SHOULD be years used to develop prospects there should be a different goal than trying to win every game or maybe break the game down into parts, start off playing the prospects equally and if close maybe "shorten" the bench otherwise get the prospects as much ice time, equally, as possible. Invest for the future by getting them experience now. Use errors in NHL games for coaching and NHL games to guage corrections, this can be done if the threat of elimination is removed. Take that pressure off to begin with.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Benning's comments leave that unclear, he talks of "roles", not sure how much he will have to do with game management.

 

IMO, since these SHOULD be years used to develop prospects there should be a different goal than trying to win every game or maybe break the game down into parts, start off playing the prospects equally and if close maybe "shorten" the bench otherwise get the prospects as much ice time, equally, as possible. Invest for the future by getting them experience now. Use errors in NHL games for coaching and NHL games to guage corrections, this can be done if the threat of elimination is removed. Take that pressure off to begin with.  

For me, the NHL is not a developmental league. Not to say we cannot develop players in the NHL, but you have to have something you excel in at the NHL level to keep you up and hopefully can hone the rest of your game there. In this scenario, those players are put in positions where they will succeed and it's not minimal 4th line minutes unless that's the type of player you are trying to develop.

 

There is a reason why the AHL exists and it's a farm team system. The end goal for an NHL team should always be to try and make the playoffs and win the Cup if you get there and that's what paying customers will come to see. We can sit here and say let's play a throw away season and watch nightly mistakes from prospects until they learn, but will you pay to watch that? We have high hopes for our prospects, but not all of these players are going to put butts in the seats, except Pettersson and maybe Hughes and therefore the only guys that are worth getting into the NHL sooner than later. In the end it's a business and they only sell tickets when the team is doing well in this market.

 

I look at a team like Tampa right now who have put their players through their farm system, whether short term or not, and they've built a strong foundation. They continue to grow through their farm and have one of the stronger AHL teams while continuing to add to their top NHL team. There are maybe 1 or 2 guys that will get a full time spot and everyone else gets spot time occasionally. There are seeing where their prospects are at by calling them up and playing them in their suited roles and will make space when they feel a prospect is ready rather than giving them a spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smithers joe said:

i think it depends on what they lack at the start of their careers. horvat became a more complete player by learning the defensive game his first year. you wouldn't put pettersson down there, but players like virtanen, lind, gaudette and goldy might become better all around players by starting there. 

There are certainly players that can benefit from starting on the 4th line and Horvat is a good example of that. Virtanen is a good example of why you don't rush your prospects. He needed AHL time and when they finally got him down, he was able to reset and get his game back together slowly. Virtanen's first two years were full of fans dumping on him and suggesting he should be traded and now we want to do this again with more prospects?

 

Every prospect is different and some can learn differently, but I don't agree with having spots open specifically for player development on the NHL team. If there are prospects that are quality enough to crack an NHL roster, they will get their chances throughout the season or a spot will be opened up for them. We are potentially weeding out players that may not be up to par at the NHL level in Gaunce or Goldobin for example and that is not a bad thing because not every player will pan out to how we may envision them to become unfortunately.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-07-10 at 12:51 PM, Rob_Zepp said:

OK, who is going to claim him and who do they release to make it happen.   Come waivers in October, EVERY team has a Goldobin or two and most teams have CAP issues and certainly all have contract space issues.   Players better than Goldy are waived at the start of each season - rarely do they get picked up.

Letting go of Goldobin is a huge mistake imo. This guy is on the verge of having a break out year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, theo5789 said:

There is a reason why the AHL exists and it's a farm team system. The end goal for an NHL team should always be to try and make the playoffs and win the Cup if you get there and that's what paying customers will come to see. We can sit here and say let's play a throw away season and watch nightly mistakes from prospects until they learn, but will you pay to watch that? We have high hopes for our prospects, but not all of these players are going to put butts in the seats, except Pettersson and maybe Hughes and therefore the only guys that are worth getting into the NHL sooner than later. In the end it's a business and they only sell tickets when the team is doing well in this market.

I understand the idea of the farm system, to get players ready to step into the same system as the big team. You can't have your farm team playing run and gun hockey and the big team a left side lock and expect a prospect to step in and mesh. But then very few drafted prospects have graduated from the AHL. The best on the team have had less than 10 games in the AHL, Horvat, Boeser, Stecher and Hutton. I don't think the AHL helped Virtanen at all except maybe off the ice, Virtanen's game is speed offensively and using his size at appropriate times, his time on the farm was spent trying to make him a defensive grinder.

 

Pay to watch? The fans up to last year have been paying to watch old vets at the end of their careers lose an average of 51 games (SO & OT) per year, I know I do watch Jake to see his blazing speed out skate McDavid in race from his blue line on a breakaway, I don't know why that has been buried and neglected, it is significant.

 

Hockey is a game of mistakes and no matter where a player comes from it takes time to adjust, grinders can learned to be human torpedo's on the farm and do that if they move up, but for those players they risk injury just to stay in the show because they are marginal and can be replaced easily, it also makes them very easy to coach;  jump, player; how high and when can I come down?

22 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I look at a team like Tampa right now who have put their players through their farm system, whether short term or not, and they've built a strong foundation

That isn't really accurate only 3rd/4th liners Paquette, Erne and Palat and undrafted Johnson and Gourde have spent any significant time on the farm, their top round picks go straight into the NHL, Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, Segachev, Point …..

 

Top players went straight into the league as it is with most players in the new, modern NHL. Posters have to look hard to find any player drafted in the top two rounds that ended up being "ruined" by playing in the NHL over the last 5/6 years. Name 5 players, you can't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gudbransons_Elbow said:

Letting go of Goldobin is a huge mistake imo. This guy is on the verge of having a break out year.

A Boucher or McEneny okay, but don't think we'll risk Goldy on waivers, even if at the "safest" time of the year, right before the season starts.  Even if he has a poor camp and we want to cut bait, would think we can at least recoup a pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

A Boucher or McEneny okay, but don't think we'll risk Goldy on waivers, even if at the "safest" time of the year, right before the season starts.  Even if he has a poor camp and we want to cut bait, would think we can at least recoup a pick.

I would agree, as both Boucher on waivers and McEneny ;as a FA signing, cost the club nothing more than the dollars spent on them. The club did; however, give up a decent but aging player (an asset) to acquire Goldy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's really important that we have an offensive minded 2C that can play offensive minutes. That'll be key for the development of our offensive prospects (Pettersson, Goldobin and Leipsic) and put them in a better position to succeed than playing in the bottom-6 with Sutter/Beagle. Whoever's playing well out of those 3 can play on the top line with Horvat and Boeser. Gagner fits the role the best, even though I was hoping we could find a better option this offseason. We also can't waive Goldobin or Leipsic as they will more than likely be claimed. 

 

With that said, the first major casualty is Gaudette. I don't think he has enough experience to take that 2C spot from Gagner and he's not going to displace any of the other centers. He get's sent down to Utica, even though I think he should've been our 4C this year. He's first in line for a callup at forward though. 

 

After that, the I would also send down Granlund, Gaunce and Dahlen. The first two shouldn't get claimed and Dahlen simply doesn't have an opening. Those 3 going down make Utica that much better though. No real significant moves after that. 

 

Canucks:

 

Pettersson - Horvat - Boeser

Baertschi - Gagner - Goldobin

Roussel - Sutter - Eriksson

Leipsic - Beagle - Virtanen

Schaller

 

Edler - Gudbranson

Del Zotto - Tanev

Pouliot - Stetcher

Hutton, Biega

 

Comets:

 

Dahlen - Granlund - Boucher

Motte - Kero - Lind

Gadjovich - Gaudette - Palmu

Archibald - Gaunce - Jasek

MacEwan, MacMaster, Bancks, Darcy, Hamilton

 

Juolevi - McEneny

Sautner - Chatfield

Brisebois - Sifers

Blujus, Dirk

 

With that roster, the players we risk on waivers are: Boucher, Granlund, Gaunce and Archibald. The young-ish players that we don't expose to waivers at all are Goldobin, Leipsic, Virtanen, Hutton and Pouliot.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gudbransons_Elbow said:

Letting go of Goldobin is a huge mistake imo. This guy is on the verge of having a break out year.

Then he won’t have any trouble making the team.   Can’t have it both ways.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I think it's really important that we have an offensive minded 2C that can play offensive minutes. That'll be key for the development of our offensive prospects (Pettersson, Goldobin and Leipsic) and put them in a better position to succeed than playing in the bottom-6 with Sutter/Beagle. Whoever's playing well out of those 3 can play on the top line with Horvat and Boeser. Gagner fits the role the best, even though I was hoping we could find a better option this offseason. We also can't waive Goldobin or Leipsic as they will more than likely be claimed. 

 

With that said, the first major casualty is Gaudette. I don't think he has enough experience to take that 2C spot from Gagner and he's not going to displace any of the other centers. He get's sent down to Utica, even though I think he should've been our 4C this year. He's first in line for a callup at forward though. 

 

After that, the I would also send down Granlund, Gaunce and Dahlen. The first two shouldn't get claimed and Dahlen simply doesn't have an opening. Those 3 going down make Utica that much better though. No real significant moves after that. 

 

Canucks:

 

Pettersson - Horvat - Boeser

Baertschi - Gagner - Goldobin

Roussel - Sutter - Eriksson

Leipsic - Beagle - Virtanen

Schaller

 

Edler - Gudbranson

Del Zotto - Tanev

Pouliot - Stetcher

Hutton, Biega

 

Comets:

 

Dahlen - Granlund - Boucher

Motte - Kero - Lind

Gadjovich - Gaudette - Palmu

Archibald - Gaunce - Jasek

MacEwan, MacMaster, Bancks, Darcy, Hamilton

 

Juolevi - McEneny

Sautner - Chatfield

Brisebois - Sifers

Blujus, Dirk

 

With that roster, the players we risk on waivers are: Boucher, Granlund, Gaunce and Archibald. The young-ish players that we don't expose to waivers at all are Goldobin, Leipsic, Virtanen, Hutton and Pouliot.

 

Gagner you can put on waivers play Schaller at center instead big and fast with some finish

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

I understand the idea of the farm system, to get players ready to step into the same system as the big team. You can't have your farm team playing run and gun hockey and the big team a left side lock and expect a prospect to step in and mesh. But then very few drafted prospects have graduated from the AHL. The best on the team have had less than 10 games in the AHL, Horvat, Boeser, Stecher and Hutton. I don't think the AHL helped Virtanen at all except maybe off the ice, Virtanen's game is speed offensively and using his size at appropriate times, his time on the farm was spent trying to make him a defensive grinder.

I mentioned Pettersson and Hughes could get a look this season and they would be put in positions to succeed and not be developed on the 4th line as was suggested. Horvat and Boeser are just other examples of what I've been saying. Hutton and Stecher have been playing on one of the weakest D groups and they have both regressed (points-wise at least) while being "developed" in the NHL.

 

As for Virtanen, his hockey sense was a step behind and he came into the sophomore season in the wrong shape. He needed to be reset and away from the microscope here. If the team wasn't so injury plagued last season, it's questionable how many games he would've drawn into since he was used sparingly for most of the season until the end of the year when something clicked. He probably would've been a guy regularly called up and that is perfectly fine as well.

 

11 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

 

Pay to watch? The fans up to last year have been paying to watch old vets at the end of their careers lose an average of 51 games (SO & OT) per year, I know I do watch Jake to see his blazing speed out skate McDavid in race from his blue line on a breakaway, I don't know why that has been buried and neglected, it is significant.

Not many fans are paying to watch, have you seen the empty seats? If the prospects are not doing well, then instead of dumping on these aging veterans, the venom will be aimed at these prospects instead. I guess that will help toughen up their psyche?

 

I'm glad one standout play is all it takes to forget the rest of the year when Virtanen was constantly being mentioned to be traded by many of these same fans.

 

11 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Hockey is a game of mistakes and no matter where a player comes from it takes time to adjust, grinders can learned to be human torpedo's on the farm and do that if they move up, but for those players they risk injury just to stay in the show because they are marginal and can be replaced easily, it also makes them very easy to coach;  jump, player; how high and when can I come down?

The NHL is the best league in the world and if a prospect cannot beat out a veteran for a spot then they clearly are not ready yet. Why bother having a farm team and not using it? If we have a 4th line grinder prospect that we would like to develop as a 4th line prospect, then sure play them as a 4th liner. I prefer prospects like Gaudette and Lind for example to get more minutes in the AHL and learn from their inevitable mistakes there more quickly going through more game action than be limited in 4th line sheltered duties. If they perform well enough to be deserving of a spot in the role expected of them, then good on them for doing so as they beat out the competition we have set out for them.

 

11 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

That isn't really accurate only 3rd/4th liners Paquette, Erne and Palat and undrafted Johnson and Gourde have spent any significant time on the farm, their top round picks go straight into the NHL, Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, Segachev, Point …..

Kucherov had some AHL time and proved that he was too dominant there to keep him there. It is certainly not unreasonable to have Pettersson/Hughes follow that path as much as they could simply crack the opening roster. Point had a taste of the AHL and that didn't hurt his development, so it's no reason to be disappointed if any prospect starts the year in the AHL because it could be a brief stint.

 

But to add to the list you mentioned, Killorn had AHL time, as did Namestikov (who they utilized to trade for McDonagh, who also had some AHL time). JT Miller who they acquired and recently gave a nice big extension to played through the AHL system. Vasilevskiy as well. Most of their other depth is through their farm and they can almost seemingly call anyone up and will slide right in nicely.

 

11 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

 

Top players went straight into the league as it is with most players in the new, modern NHL. Posters have to look hard to find any player drafted in the top two rounds that ended up being "ruined" by playing in the NHL over the last 5/6 years. Name 5 players, you can't. 

 I haven't suggested that top players or even all players should go through the AHL first, but these are top players that proved they could step in rather than be handed a spot for developmental purposes.

 

As for 5 players in the last 5/6 years, I'd say Yakupov, Ryan Murray, Nichushkin, Zadorov, Lazar and I'm curious to where Drouin's and Bennett's careers leads to. I can probably list you far more players where the AHL doesn't "ruin" their development.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I would agree, as both Boucher on waivers and McEneny ;as a FA signing, cost the club nothing more than the dollars spent on them. The club did; however, give up a decent but aging player (an asset) to acquire Goldy

We gave up a player that we may have lost anyway to the expansion draft, so I'm not too concerned plus we gained Palmu and Gunnarsson out of the deal who we continue to develop. We gained a project player in Goldobin who I would like to have more time to work with, but he remains a project, so if we lose him to waivers, there will be others like him going back on waivers if we want to take a flyer (eg Boucher).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-07-12 at 3:28 PM, theo5789 said:

There are certainly players that can benefit from starting on the 4th line and Horvat is a good example of that. Virtanen is a good example of why you don't rush your prospects. He needed AHL time and when they finally got him down, he was able to reset and get his game back together slowly. Virtanen's first two years were full of fans dumping on him and suggesting he should be traded and now we want to do this again with more prospects?

 

Every prospect is different and some can learn differently, but I don't agree with having spots open specifically for player development on the NHL team. If there are prospects that are quality enough to crack an NHL roster, they will get their chances throughout the season or a spot will be opened up for them. We are potentially weeding out players that may not be up to par at the NHL level in Gaunce or Goldobin for example and that is not a bad thing because not every player will pan out to how we may envision them to become unfortunately.

Well said.  I'm all for every prospect we have going through the AHL or the College route before getting NHL games, the last year of junior might (or development limbo) can be counterproductive so Europe might be an alternative as well, like OJ last year.  If they can play in the AHL then consider when to insert them into the line-up and go from there.  Same if players have exceptional seasons like Pettersson and Gaudette had last year, they've earned a chance to show if they can translate that at the NHL level.  

 

We are entering the zone where a lot of our prospects are getting close, when they get their chances they'll have two or three other guys right behind them soon and need to make the most of it or back to the AHL they should go.  Both Goldobin and Gaunce could end up getting waived, that would suck but it's not the end of the world either, for our teams success we have to be ready to cut bait and learn when a player is ready for their turn.  

 

Right now two strategic factors are in play too for letting the majority of them develop in the AHL for a year, one Seattle expansion, the more guys we don't have to protect the better chance we won't lose a promising young player, and two another high pick or two will almost gaurantee our success three or four years from now both in the actual standings and from a cap standpoint.   One thing CHI and Vegas have taught us is that a top heavy team requires a lot of trading and constant stream of cheaper ELC options which are hard to find when picking at the end of the first round (if you haven't traded that pick to better your cup chances), and with Vegas you don't actually need to spend to the cap or have multiple expensive contracts to contend IF your goalie is playing great.

 

If I was Benning I'd start with Pettersson and Goldobin in the NHL and that's it.  The rest get call-ups when it's time to do something with an underperforming player or if an injury requires it.  I think Dahlen will play himself into the line-up at some point, same with Gaudette this year, the rest won't.  The following season will be when the damn bursts and we could be like TO was Mathews first year when they played five rookies regularly, and had around 7 total get a look.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

I understand the idea of the farm system, to get players ready to step into the same system as the big team. You can't have your farm team playing run and gun hockey and the big team a left side lock and expect a prospect to step in and mesh. But then very few drafted prospects have graduated from the AHL. The best on the team have had less than 10 games in the AHL, Horvat, Boeser, Stecher and Hutton. I don't think the AHL helped Virtanen at all except maybe off the ice, Virtanen's game is speed offensively and using his size at appropriate times, his time on the farm was spent trying to make him a defensive grinder.

 

Pay to watch? The fans up to last year have been paying to watch old vets at the end of their careers lose an average of 51 games (SO & OT) per year, I know I do watch Jake to see his blazing speed out skate McDavid in race from his blue line on a breakaway, I don't know why that has been buried and neglected, it is significant.

 

Hockey is a game of mistakes and no matter where a player comes from it takes time to adjust, grinders can learned to be human torpedo's on the farm and do that if they move up, but for those players they risk injury just to stay in the show because they are marginal and can be replaced easily, it also makes them very easy to coach;  jump, player; how high and when can I come down?

That isn't really accurate only 3rd/4th liners Paquette, Erne and Palat and undrafted Johnson and Gourde have spent any significant time on the farm, their top round picks go straight into the NHL, Stamkos, Kucherov, Hedman, Segachev, Point …..

 

Top players went straight into the league as it is with most players in the new, modern NHL. Posters have to look hard to find any player drafted in the top two rounds that ended up being "ruined" by playing in the NHL over the last 5/6 years. Name 5 players, you can't. 

The TB guys that saw significant time in the AHL became part of the most dominant and impressive AHL team all-time (including Conacher who started out pretty good and then was traded to OTT and eventually faded out).  That's some invaluable experience that they learned and have taken to the big club, and together they now form the best third line in hockey (would be a good second line on most teams, in fact before Kucherov they were one of the best second lines in hockey, Point discplaced them, really where do they find all these guys?).   Kucherov and Point also saw some time in the AHL, which isn't surprising given when  Yzerman played and then was part of Detroit after for decades they would let their talent brew until ready and then bring them on board.

 

Perry and Getzlaf played in the AHL an extra year before getting their turn and it helped their development immensely, then formed one of the better rookie lines we've seen in the modern era all the way to a cup.    E. Staal played a year in the AHL after a ho-hum first year in the lock-out and then had his best season ever of 100pts the following year (he was given top minutes and it helped him immensely).   Both Stamkos and Thornton were first overalls who came in right away and had underwhelming first years...then started to light it up, my money goes if the played a year in the AHL it wouldn't have hurt, and then they'd both have Calder trophies to add to their collections.  We've all seen the pictures of Pettersson, he could use 20-30lbs of muscle on his frame, and the AHL is a little easier to avoid getting creamed...as far as Hughes goes, I really can't say, he's a mutant that could probably move away in a micro-second to avoid been squashed so who knows if he's ready.  One things for sure though, the AHL never stymied a players development, I mean that's what it's there for, where jumping into the NHL quickly can have very dire consequences (Yakupov scored more goals than Svecknikov, there is a reason he went first).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHL is full of AHL graduates, playing in Utica would not hurt any ones development  as long as when they are ready there is room for them on the big club . Holding a place because of contract size or we owe them is bad management move on with a better option . Buy out waivers long term IR who cares as long as the right choice is made. This is a business first , Players do whats best for them its time we started doing whats best for the team .  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Are you talking about using Schaller as our 2nd line center?

Are you talking about Gagner being a 2nd line center . Gagner has skill but limited speed and no physical push , Schaller may not be as skilled but defensive presence grit would allow Pettersson to have more room .Left winger could be Eriksson  or  Baertschi  . The skill added to Schaller's line would help his offence .The grit added to help Pettersson will give him room .We cant have people intimidating Pettersson at will.

40 points from Schaller would not be unreasonable . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

boeser horvat liepsic

sutter petterson beartchi 

goldobin granlund virtanen 

roussel beagle erickson

13th forward schaller/ gaunce / dahlen

waive gagner

put sutter on wing 5 on 5

edler stecher 

hughes tanev 

pouliot/hutton/ del zotto with  gudbranson

markstrom 

demko 

nilson

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • SNuck changed the title to [Discussion] Starting line-up and Waiver Concerns
On 2018-07-13 at 6:51 PM, KKnight said:

I predict at least one forward is dealt before training camp.

If Hughes is signed, there is going to be an additional trade. 

Yeah im thinking the same thing,,but im not sure Gaunce is going to want to stick around if he is an odd man out,,either,,

Gagner ,id move,for sure,,and Eriksson is just killing this line up,,,he is on a last chance im thinking..

Link to post
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...