spook007 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 4 hours ago, Jester13 said: This season seriously couldn't have gone any better. So many ups and downs, emotional plays, dirty plays, etc. etc., that this is exactly what our young team needs to learn all facets of the NHL. Every game is a learning experience. This is how our guys will learn how to grow and gel together to one day be a Stanley Cup winning team. Sure, our lows this year have been low, but we have seen the potential. Love this team, love this coach, and already can't wait for next year. Wow.... Nice one. Thanks In amongst all the infighting a really positive post... Agree 100% Need to know though, FA is this you....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 Just now, Alflives said: Are our top young players that small? Hughes is small, but the rest are kind of taller, or heavier, no? EP is 6'2" but thin, he will grow into his body and add 25 lbs yet, Brock is 6'1" and Horvat under league average at 6'. The Canucks will have 4 players 5'10" and under, 4 - 5'11" and under, 3 - 6' and under, 5 - 6'1" and under, all those are under the league average of 6'1 3/4". 16 players under the league average "size". That is more than any other team except Tampa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 1 minute ago, TheGuardian_ said: EP is 6'2" but thin, he will grow into his body and add 25 lbs yet, Brock is 6'1" and Horvat under league average at 6'. The Canucks will have 4 players 5'10" and under, 4 - 5'11" and under, 3 - 6' and under, 5 - 6'1" and under, all those are under the league average of 6'1 3/4". 16 players under the league average "size". That is more than any other team except Tampa. Maybe we need guys who are thick in their bottoms and legs, more than just taller? Bo might only be 5"11, but he's built like a tank. I think Boeser is a big boy too. Pettersson , although taller, needs to gain muscle. Aren't many of the shorter TBay guys kind of stocky built? Those shorter guys, if build stocky, can be impossible to move off pucks, while being extremely quick too. It makes them super hard to handle. Go at them, and they out quick you. Man up, and they spin on you. Once they get a step on you, they are very hard to get around too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 benning has so many forwards he needs to trade or sign a simmonds or reaves to protect petersson and maybe use our 3rd 4th rounders for tough junior kids players that could be traded roussel, leivo, granlund, spooner, baertchi, schaller, sutter, tanev, pouliot eriksson (half his salary retained or waived) would open up another 24 mill in cap soo wed have 46 mill to buy 2-3 elite players and have money to resign boeser petersson when entry level contacts are up trader jim needs to cut the fat on the team petersson boeser pearson bo goldobin virtanen gaudette motte beagle edler stecher hughes juolevi schenn biega sautner marky demko could target long term (karlsson, panarin, simmonds, ferland) or short term (stralman, methot, nyquivst, chara) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 51 minutes ago, Alflives said: Yes, I agree that the Rangers will shorten this current rebuilding period. However, unless those draft picks end up providing elite talent (like Pettersson and Quinn and Boeser) the finished rebuild (new young core with which to go forward with) will be mediocre at best. Having extra first and second round picks increases the chances of the finished rebuilt new young core being better, but the GM still has to have a couple phenoms out of those picks. IMO But, they also slide down and get a solid chance in the lotto. A team that goes all into a rebuild usually get a few top 5 picks while they go through the rebuild. The extra first and second round picks are what helps to rebuild your entire system depth. As you are saying they still need to execute on their drafting. ( find the elite talent) The problem for the Canucks is that the only time they had enough older assets to move was the first or at the very latest the beginning of the second year for Linden. That was their window to blow it up. The Rangers have caught that time line right. They are moving players while they are still valuable. The canucks are now sitting with jack sh** to trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 9 hours ago, canuck73_3 said: Reputation call on Lemieux he rarely gets the benefit of the doubt. I wasn't a fan of the follow through towards the head either. He also switched wings on the faceoff to start a fight which Roussel declined. Lemieux was out there to hurt or try change momentum imo. I don't know Lemieux well enough, so will take your word for it. I wasn't sure it was so much follow through as reaction to surprise of Roussel stumbling in there. Hard to know whether it was deliberate or reflex. If it was deliberate, well, he got his due then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 33 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said: EP is 6'2" but thin, he will grow into his body and add 25 lbs yet, Brock is 6'1" and Horvat under league average at 6'. The Canucks will have 4 players 5'10" and under, 4 - 5'11" and under, 3 - 6' and under, 5 - 6'1" and under, all those are under the league average of 6'1 3/4". 16 players under the league average "size". That is more than any other team except Tampa. Seems like size isn't an issue for the best team in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItalianCanuck1 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 Man, Tyler Motte. So sad for Roussel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Mad Bro? Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 10 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said: I reckon you don't like? Or understand hockey... Motte busts his nut checking, gets minimal offensive zone starts. See's the best, and toughest competition other teams have. He hounds their puck carriers and D. Causes turnovers and gets the puck up ice for a face off. In comes Petey & Brock. Its his role. He's still on track for 11 goals and 21 points. That is really good 4th line performance. We win and you bag the guy who broke out for 2 goals? You would not know good hockey till it punched you in the face! Who would you prefer on your team, Motte? Or Sestito? Lemme guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 33 minutes ago, appleboy said: But, they also slide down and get a solid chance in the lotto. A team that goes all into a rebuild usually get a few top 5 picks while they go through the rebuild. The extra first and second round picks are what helps to rebuild your entire system depth. As you are saying they still need to execute on their drafting. ( find the elite talent) The problem for the Canucks is that the only time they had enough older assets to move was the first or at the very latest the beginning of the second year for Linden. That was their window to blow it up. The Rangers have caught that time line right. They are moving players while they are still valuable. The canucks are now sitting with jack sh** to trade. We have our newly drafted core guys, and young prospects to trade for picks, but that defeats the entire purpose of the rebuild, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 3 hours ago, GreyHatnDart said: I’ve had this same argument over and over with people... what kind of players should people expect to have on a 3rd and 4th line? Ideally, you want hardworking puck-hounds, tenacious on the forecheck with the ability to rush the opposing D into making mistakes. Motte fits the bill in all those aspects, as well as having some scoring ability. Leads all Canucks in hits, nearly 3:1 in takeaways to giveaways, 3rd in blocked shots for forwards, all while having just 6 penalty minutes all season. If a guy that plays the way he does can consistently put up 12-15 goals per season, that’s a player I want in my bottom 6, all day long. Yeah, but is he really all that great... On NHL19? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 43 minutes ago, appleboy said: But, they also slide down and get a solid chance in the lotto. A team that goes all into a rebuild usually get a few top 5 picks while they go through the rebuild. The extra first and second round picks are what helps to rebuild your entire system depth. As you are saying they still need to execute on their drafting. ( find the elite talent) The problem for the Canucks is that the only time they had enough older assets to move was the first or at the very latest the beginning of the second year for Linden. That was their window to blow it up. The Rangers have caught that time line right. They are moving players while they are still valuable. The canucks are now sitting with jack sh** to trade. Context. Our most valueable trade assets: Sedins- weren't moving Edler- used his NTC Hamhuis- wouldn't waive to Washington by the time he gave the OK to Dallas they acquired Russell Kesler-limited the options to one team Hansen was traded for Goldobin who has been fine here so far Burrows-traded for Dahlen who was then traded for a player Benning liked at the draft. Context matters. The Rangers had a much better and easier starting point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said: Context. Our most valueable trade assets: Sedins- weren't moving Edler- used his NTC Hamhuis- wouldn't waive to Washington by the time he gave the OK to Dallas they acquired Russell Kesler-limited the options to one team Hansen was traded for Goldobin who has been fine here so far Burrows-traded for Dahlen who was then traded for a player Benning liked at the draft. Context matters. The Rangers had a much better and easier starting point. Maybe that's why Trevor kept saying it wasn't fair to the Twins, while they were still here, to do a tear down rebuild, because it was impossible to do that type of rebuild, considering the context you described? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 5 hours ago, CanucksJay said: The lack of high end D on this team + injuries forced Gudbranson to play higher up in the lineup than he should have. He is a solid 5th d-man that can fill in for 4D in a pinch. Not his fault he got utilized in a role not fit for him. Green actually didn't significantly up his minutes that much with the injuries. Hutton and Stecher minutes were increased. He needs the right kind of partner to carry even just a third pairing which imho a number 5 is. He'll get that chance with Letang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gameburn Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 6 minutes ago, Alflives said: We have our newly drafted core guys, and young prospects to trade for picks, but that defeats the entire purpose of the rebuild, right? I don't think you are in a disagreement. I think he's just saying what you and a lot of us have been saying for 2 years: why didn't we move the older players earlier. Guys like Edler and Tanev obviously; but guys like Eriksson, Hamhuis; anyone over 26 who is not a core player, basically. We're not talking about moving Lind, Gadjovich, Brisebois, Chatfield, etc. But a lot of these older guys are hard to move. Eriksson is about 2 weeks from being waived: who would want him at his cap hit? Edler with his infamous No-movement-clause... Tanev injured half the time... The team had the money for Eriksson, so you can appreciate why Benning took a chance with him. They (mgt) now openly talk about the lack of production from some of the vets... I suspect that a LOT of players are playing for their jobs right now and don't know it. (Higgins and Gagner all over again.) We may see Eriksson waived to Utica. I think we're all glad we picked up Schaller and Beagle via FA rather than trading anything of value. Roussel is a different story: he might be one of the better FA signings in Canucks history. (Of course, he could be traded if the offer was good... anybody other than Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and Pettersson is probably available as we speak.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Odd. said: he should have gotten at least a game Agree, but sadly the Dopes take into account the amount of time missed in the game played. He was booted early, so that counts as a game to the Dopes. Stupid way to do it, IMO, since it lowers the scale for future suspension of similar infractions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, gameburn said: I don't think you are in a disagreement. I think he's just saying what you and a lot of us have been saying for 2 years: why didn't we move the older players earlier. Guys like Edler and Tanev obviously; but guys like Eriksson, Hamhuis; anyone over 26 who is not a core player, basically. We're not talking about moving Lind, Gadjovich, Brisebois, Chatfield, etc. But a lot of these older guys are hard to move. Eriksson is about 2 weeks from being waived: who would want him at his cap hit? Edler with his infamous No-movement-clause... Tanev injured half the time... The team had the money for Eriksson, so you can appreciate why Benning took a chance with him. They (mgt) now openly talk about the lack of production from some of the vets... I suspect that a LOT of players are playing for their jobs right now and don't know it. (Higgins and Gagner all over again.) We may see Eriksson waived to Utica. I think we're all glad we picked up Schaller and Beagle via FA rather than trading anything of value. Roussel is a different story: he might be one of the better FA signings in Canucks history. (Of course, he could be traded if the offer was good... anybody other than Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and Pettersson is probably available as we speak.) Eriksson will be traded or stay on our roster, it doesn't save us that much cap sending him to Utica and no owner will be okay with a player @$6mill per being in Utica for 3 years. Unless he’s traded were stuck with him in our bottom 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 12 minutes ago, Alflives said: Maybe that's why Trevor kept saying it wasn't fair to the Twins, while they were still here, to do a tear down rebuild, because it was impossible to do that type of rebuild, considering the context you described? That's just it our 3 most valueable pieces have never shown any interest in being moved. That alone puts us behind what the Rangers had to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 44 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Seems like size isn't an issue for the best team in the league. Smaller skilled forwards but big Dmen is the new NHL. It's still evolving but a team can't have too many Stecher or Hughes size Dmen. Tampa's smallest Dman is Stralman 5'11 190lbs. Everyone else is big. Averaging around 6'3 215 lbs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 3 hours ago, GreyHatnDart said: I’ve had this same argument over and over with people... what kind of players should people expect to have on a 3rd and 4th line? Ideally, you want hardworking puck-hounds, tenacious on the forecheck with the ability to rush the opposing D into making mistakes. Motte fits the bill in all those aspects, as well as having some scoring ability. Leads all Canucks in hits, nearly 3:1 in takeaways to giveaways, 3rd in blocked shots for forwards, all while having just 6 penalty minutes all season. If a guy that plays the way he does can consistently put up 12-15 goals per season, that’s a player I want in my bottom 6, all day long. 10 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said: I reckon you don't like? Or understand hockey... Motte busts his nut checking, gets minimal offensive zone starts. See's the best, and toughest competition other teams have. He hounds their puck carriers and D. Causes turnovers and gets the puck up ice for a face off. In comes Petey & Brock. Its his role. He's still on track for 11 goals and 21 points. That is really good 4th line performance. We win and you bag the guy who broke out for 2 goals? You would not know good hockey till it punched you in the face! Who would you prefer on your team, Motte? Or Sestito? Lemme guess... May I invite you fine gentlemen to the Motte thread where we're having a good laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.