[Signing] Canucks sign Micheal Ferland

[oldnews]

16 minutes ago, rekker said:

For sure. Sutter, if healthy, is an important, shutdown center and great at draws. A righty to boot. But kids and players do get preferential treatment based on last names. Always have and always will. Guess the same can be said for many professions.

Keith Gretzky may be a patronage NHL exec, but no one ever gave him an NHL minute based on a name.

 

Brandon Sutter has earned his NHL minutes, period, regardless of his name.

 

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Borvat said:

I will come around when he proves he is still effective and can stay healthy.  Until then I remain skeptical at worst and hopeful at best.  It's been a while and a few injuries since he has been close to what we thought we were getting and what he once was.

On a good note as discussed in that thread so long ago:

 

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

...In that situation, it's not impossible to see us moving on from him at some point in the not distant future and transitioning to a 3rd line that's more focused on secondary offensive/2 way play that becomes an opposition match up problem vs an outright match up/sheltering/furnishing ozone line...

 

...-Gaudette's line (theoretically) becomes a match up problem for the other team.

 

Again, just a thought experiment, but I believe that's the intended/eventual destination whether it's this October, later this season, next season etc. A lot will depend on Gaudette's readiness.

 

 

... We'll get to where you want us to head. We're just not quite there yet  

[gameburn]

On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 9:28 AM, xereau said:

We have a gritty team, boys. Damn.

If you look up on youtube for "fights, Ferland" you find that over a third of the fights with NHLers were with guys who now play for the Canucks.  Pre-season will be interesting lol.

Ferland absolutely protects his linemates.  And no sign the coach has to send him out there to do it.  Two or three occasions show Ferland overstaying his shift to make sure an opponent gets the message about targeting linemates.  If he had been on the ice when Matheson went after EP40? 

 

Some of his body checks are vintage too: similar to Virtanen but nastier.  Ferland looks mean though; haven't seen anyone on the Canucks like this that I can remember, not even Bieksa.   

Loui at 6 million vs. Ferland at 3.5... amazing.

[Dr. Crossbar]

6 minutes ago, gameburn said:

If you look up on youtube for "fights, Ferland" you find that over a third of the fights with NHLers were with guys who now play for the Canucks.  Pre-season will be interesting lol.

Ferland absolutely protects his linemates.  And no sign the coach has to send him out there to do it.  Two or three occasions show Ferland overstaying his shift to make sure an opponent gets the message about targeting linemates.  If he had been on the ice when Matheson went after EP40? 

 

Some of his body checks are vintage too: similar to Virtanen but nastier.  Ferland looks mean though; haven't seen anyone on the Canucks like this that I can remember, not even Bieksa.   

Loui at 6 million vs. Ferland at 3.5... amazing.

Ferland vs. JT Miller

 

 

[rekker]

10 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Keith Gretzky may be a patronage NHL exec, but no one ever gave him an NHL minute based on a name.

 

Brandon Sutter has earned his NHL minutes, period, regardless of his name.

 

I never said Sutter didnt earn his minutes in the NHL and I like his game. I have witnessed favouritism first hand and often. Both Sutter and Keith may have as youths as well, who knows. But it is a reality absolutely and for certain. 

[gameburn]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Ferland vs. JT Miller

 

 

I was surprised when I realized this was Miller.  Not many guys can stand in there with Ferland. Miller is a bit lighter too.

[Brovat]

18 minutes ago, Borvat said:

I will come around when he proves he is still effective and can stay healthy.  Until then I remain skeptical at worst and hopeful at best.  It's been a while and a few injuries since he has been close to what we thought we were getting and what he once was.

I firmly believe Gaudette will be a way better player than Sutter and I don’t dislike Sutters game. I’m just that high on the kid. 

[Podz92]

I really hope this signing will put an end to all the Lucic to Vancouver rumours 

[Dr. Crossbar]

6 minutes ago, gameburn said:

I was surprised when I realized this was Miller.  Not many guys can stand in there with Ferland. Miller is a bit lighter too.

Says a lot about Miller. Glad they're with us.

 

This one clip is culture change in under 2 minutes.

[ilduce39]

35 minutes ago, Borvat said:

I think you are correct.  I was pretty hard on Sutter last year mostly out of frustration and the team losing too many players to injury all the time - including Sutter.  But "IF" he can stay healthy I think it's best to send Adam down to get him some confidence on the offensive side of his game and be a leader.  The players available for Utica will mainly be Canuck property next year and there is quite a nice group of players in their early to mid 20's.  Benning has sure been busy and it sure looks like he has a plan. Our center depth if everyone is healthy is very good including Miller if required. 

 

Assuming Goldobin, Schaller and Gaudette are there.  Add Teves and Rafferty to the D available.  Woo back to Junior.

 

  

Yeah, he’s like Tanev at this point, with injury woes it’s tough to really count on him (and easy to forget him) but those two HEALTHY really cement our C depth and give us at least an nhl caliber top 4 defence.  He was effective once we stopped trying to play him with the twins or trying to use him as a top 6 C.

 

As much as we’re improved, 65+ games apiece from them might be one path to us making the playoffs this year.  

 

Gaudette is just pure gravy at this point but it’d be nice to see him work on his scoring touch in all-situations in Utica if he isn’t needed to start the year.  If Gaudette and Juolevi are on the farm until injuries happen that could facilitate a nice bounce back for the comets.  

[Gaudette Celly]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

Can’t see us moving Sutter.  After all the moves we’ve made it’s pretty clear we’re hard charging for the playoffs and a good 3C is pretty key.  His contact is also up before the dreaded offseason where we have to re-sign Petey and Quinn.  No impetuous to move him.

 

Nothing against Gaudette as he’s a big part of the future but he’d have to show more than last season before we clear out Sutter for him.  

1. His value is likely as low as it's ever been

2. We in no way HAVE to move him, whether for salary or a roster spot

 

As has been pointed out, we do need him for what he brings -- true high-end shut-down ability and elite PKing, plus the ability to score and play in all situations.  Because we are not in a situation where we have to move cap, the best solution is to get him back playing, not just to return his value to the team but to get his asset value back up as well.

 

If in the end cap is tight, sending Schaller down gets us another $1mil, and whatever happens with Loui is likely to net us a couple more.  Plenty of time and lots of options.

[ilduce39]

3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

1. His value is likely as low as it's ever been

2. We in no way HAVE to move him, whether for salary or a roster spot

 

As has been pointed out, we do need him for what he brings -- true high-end shut-down ability and elite PKing, plus the ability to score and play in all situations.  Because we are not in a situation where we have to move cap, the best solution is to get him back playing, not just to return his value to the team but to get his asset value back up as well.

 

If in the end cap is tight, sending Schaller down gets us another $1mil, and whatever happens with Loui is likely to net us a couple more.  Plenty of time and lots of options.

True about his value as well.  He could be worth a reasonable return if he can hold together and Gaudette looks ready.

 

To think I’ve read stuff insinuating we’d have to package a sweetener like Jake to get rid of him.  Geez.  

[Bubble Man]

40 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Keith Gretzky may be a patronage NHL exec, but no one ever gave him an NHL minute based on a name.

 

Brandon Sutter has earned his NHL minutes, period, regardless of his name.

 

Dude, if His name was Kieth Berzinski instead of Gretzky he wouldn’t be an executive for an NHL team. He’d probably be on CDC throwing one liners to Benning trolls for reps. 

[The Lock]

With all this Sutter talk, here's the way I see it between our bigger contracts that could be out the door:

 

- Eriksson has to go one way or another. However, burying him in the minors still means we have 5mil against the cap as opposed to 6mil (thus, only a 1million in cap savings) but it's what might have to happen if a trade doesn't get done.

- Sutter is expensive, but he has a niche on the team and is of more value to us than Eriksson. He's going to be hard to move, but he at least provides our team with a solid defensive game and a guy who really does help on the penalty kill.

- Tanev is probably worth the most value of the 3 and probably our best bet at actually getting some cap space. On top of that, he only has 1 year left so he could be a good rental for a team looking to get into the playoffs or even just looking for a more stable defense.

 

I think, with the 3, Eriksson needs to get out of town, but I don't think anyone would disagree in thinking it will be difficult to do. Tanev has the contract that's easiest to trade while Sutter's somewhere in the middle of all of this,

Edited July 12, 2019 by The Lock

[Attila Umbrus]

22 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

1. His value is likely as low as it's ever been

2. We in no way HAVE to move him, whether for salary or a roster spot

 

As has been pointed out, we do need him for what he brings -- true high-end shut-down ability and elite PKing, plus the ability to score and play in all situations.  Because we are not in a situation where we have to move cap, the best solution is to get him back playing, not just to return his value to the team but to get his asset value back up as well.

 

If in the end cap is tight, sending Schaller down gets us another $1mil, and whatever happens with Loui is likely to net us a couple more.  Plenty of time and lots of options.

Schaller getting waived is almost a sure thing. And I can see a team claiming him too. At 1.9 cap hit both teams would basically be splitting the cost down the middle if i'm correct? And even if he clears he probably holds better trade value if he gets to the farm. Not worried about cap at all. Plus we can go over our cap during the summer. I've read back a few pages and can't seem to find anyone posting about this? Not sure what the percentage is tho? But from what i've seen in the past we can go a couple mil over the cap till the start of training camp or pre-season.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

Let me refer back to a scenario where I feel you would be right: Totorella's year. That year, everyone look like husks floating around on the ice. There was no drive. There was no determination. There was pretty much not much of anything. Edmonton has looked like that most years the past few years as well.

 

However, since Tortorella. I can't say I've seen a year out of us quite like that. Even with WD, despite the occasional issues with having Megna on the ice more than he probably deserved among other things, we've never seen players like Horvat or Sutter not have drive. They've always had drive. The defense has had drive. The majority of the team has had drive. This talk of "minimal effort": maybe Eriksson? Beyond that, I never have seen that as being the case.

 

So when you tell me people seem to have "short term memory," I don't know what you're even talking about and I wonder if you've even been watching the same team at that point. If anything, I have the upmost respect for the past few years because our team could have not had drive while "bottom feeding". They could have easily looked as bad as Edmonton has but they didn't.

 

People get fixated on the cinderella stories of the league. They see a team only take 2 years to build and think it should be the norm. They see people get lucky in the draft and drafting the right players. People are literally fixated on maybe.... 5 teams in the league?... and they'll treat it like it's how we should have done it, and I have to say, it's perhaps the most unrealistic way of looking at things. It creates skewed opinions on what we should have been doing, yet, those very teams: what if Toronto didn't get to draft Matthews and didn't get to sign Tavares? What if Pittsburgh didn't get Kessel and Bonino among others to put their team over the top?

 

People are literally fixated on what could be and it puts them in some fantasy world where they think they know more than Benning. These people literally think they are experts at the subject, whether it's from sitting in front of a computer looking at nothing but stats to just outright not liking anything the team's doing and probably never liking what the team's doing.

 

You talk about a "losing culture" when we've actually had drive. You're stomping your feet like a 10 year old not getting his treat in a supermarket, when someone tells you they saw something you didn't and, while you might think it's the other way around, I haven't seen a single specific example from you of the ENTIRE TEAM not having drive. Don't give me a single game. Don't give me the win-loss record. Give me a concrete example of where we walked onto the ice and skated around like husks, including Horvat among others. Stop beating around the bush with stuff that doesn't even prove what you're saying. Go straight to the point and prove it, otherwise, there no point to this discussion.

 

I think you're smart and I respect you, but this might be the most incoherent argument I've ever seen you come up with if I'm being perfectly honest.

 

EDIT: Just a quick edit, I hadn't read your reply to deb before posting my rant lol, but we've had civilized discussions before. Just consider where I'm coming from in this. I ask that of you before you post.

Incoming wall of text…broken up into nice paragraphs. 

 

 

See I disagree with that completely. I think people memories are very selective and it might have to do with the teams initial expectations for that year.  Canucks in torts years were expected to be a playoff team, it was the first season we missed playoffs in 5 seasons.  That creates a much more bitter taste than seasons where the expectations were much lower affecting how you remember things.  Canucks had way more exciting moments in the last few seasons with the youth creating a bigger amount of buzz. But if you were to break down game by game, canucks were less competitive overall than they were in 2013-14. 

 

In tort’s year we have the worst injury woes we’ve had in our last 10 year.  Are two stars Hank and Danial got injured and missed 10+ games each, Santo broke a rib and missed half a season, Burrows broke his jaw and only played 49 games.  Tanev and Edler missed there typical 20 games.  Luongo got traded and we were forced to play with a rookie.  They were forced to play with AHL fodder in Stanton, Dalpe, Schroeder, Jensen and a guy I recently met through another buddy who played with him at Union, Jeremy Welsh.  With all of that considering Canucks had the best December record in team history.  At the halfway mark canucks were a top 10 team in the league.  Eventually Injuries and lack of depth took over.  We just nose dived the final two months but if you average out the entire course of the year canucks still were more competitive. 

 

Here’s what the measurable facts say.

A breakdown by gf/ga, wins and points by year, 

13-14 (-25), 36 wins (83 points)

14-15 (+16), 48 wins (101 points)

15-16 (-53), 31 wins (75 points)

16-17 (-63), 30 wins (69 points)

17-18 (-38), 31 wins (73 points)

17-19 (-29), 35 wins (81 points)

 

In the last 30 years Canucks have only had 5 season where we’ve put up 75 points or less.  3 of those seasons happened in the last 4 years.  So you may believe that tort’s year we were less competitive, but the numbers show that Canucks weren’t.   We lost more games in every season by one (WD first year), we won less games in every but season but one. We got outscored by more goals in every year but one.  These numbers DO represent how competitive the team was.  The number of wins shows how many games we outplayed the other team, the number of losses show how many times we got outplayed.  The closer the gf/ga shows how close in games were.  The closer the games are the more of a fight we put up. 

 

And really I can break it down even more to really drive this home.

13-14 - 28 games lead after 2P,  31 trailing after 2P, 24 games tied after 2P

14-15 - 34 games lead after 2P,  29 trailing after 2P, 19 games tied after 2P

15-16 - 30 games lead after 2P,  34 trailing after 2P, 18 games tied after 2P

16-17 - 21 games lead after 2P,  45 trailing after 2P, 16 games tied after 2P

17-18 - 28 games lead after 2P,  42 trailing after 2P, 12 games tied after 2P

17-19 - 28 games lead after 2P,  38 trailing after 2P, 16 games tied after 2P

 

So as you can see outside of the 14-15 we were IN far more game heading into the 3rd period during the 13-14 season, than any of the last 4 seasons.  In the last 4 seasons the games were basically over before the puck drop in the 3rd.  That does not equate to a team being more competitive.  The last 4 years are the definition of a losing culture.  Numbers don’t lie or get swayed by subjective memory.

 

Not to side track things even more but again you say the oilers didn’t try. How do you know? Did you watch all there games.   Unless you watched both teams play, how can your subjective opinion compare the drive of each team?

 

I’ll close this “WALL OF TEXT” by stating…..Drive doesn’t mean competitive.  Drive is effort and commitment.  The excuse people used for contracts like Eriksson, Gagner, Vanek, and Vbrata was they were going to make the team more competitive.  You don’t need expensive UFA contracts to create drive and I’d argue they did next to nothing to providing this team with any more drive than say someone like Archibald, Chaput or Gaunce did.    Players hunger for a full time job compared to the guys showing up to collect their pay check.  Like I said Megna working his butt off doesn’t do anything to change the teams outlook on the game, it doesn’t make us more competitive.  That’s why the subjective statements like we were “competitive” is a cop out.  It’s your own subjective opinion that’s not measurable in any way.  I’m basing my opinion of my own subjective opinion but I’m also supporting it with the numbers.  If you have measurable numbers to back your side up, I’d gladly look and be willing to take them into consideration. 

 

 

Ps you want a specific example. Don’t take my word for it. Take Daniels or did you forget when he called out this team 

 

 "The only thing I worry about is effort," Sedin said, according to Iain MacIntyre of the Vancouver Sun. "And I think from some guys right now, the effort is not there. It’s not good enough. I think those guys know who they are. I think it’s embarrassing if you’re not giving the effort every night. Shift in and shift out, game in and game out, it has to be there otherwise it’s going to look like this."

"I think it’s been an issue most nights," he continued. "Early on, we won some games because we had enough guys battling. It’s about learning to win those one-on-one battles. We’re there right now, trying to battle. But we’re not winning them. That’s a big difference."

[RWMc1]

I think there's a popularity/fan fav element to the Gaudette instead of Sutter talk. Sutter has had 36.1% O zone starts (31% last season) with 52.5% face off wins and 18.03 time on ice average in his time in Vancouver. Gaudette has had 56.4 % ozone starts (59.4% last season) with 40.3 % face off wins and 11.06 time on ice average in his time here.

As others have mentioned, Beagle and Sutter can matchup against the other teams top lines leaving Bo and Elias to handle the offensive assignments. That would accomplish two things. It would limit goals against and would also force the opposing teams to decide which line to use their best defenders against allowing the other to have lesser defenders to deal with. That should help increase our offense.

I feel Gaudette would be better off getting bigger minutes and roles in Utica to strengthen his game in the long run.

 

As far as Ferlund goes, Yippee freakin doo!!! Awesome signing to help cement our now impressive line up.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, PistolPete13 said:

Your inferences are pretty clear.  However there are a few “clowns” out there who don’t agree with you. That makes for interesting discussion. P

Your opinion is the exact same as mine. Haha aka why you might be smart to read that wall of text before insulting someone. 

 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

16 minutes ago, Attila Umbrus said:

Schaller getting waived is almost a sure thing. And I can see a team claiming him too. At 1.9 cap hit both teams would basically be splitting the cost down the middle if i'm correct?

When you pick up a player on waivers it's like trading for him -- you take on him and his contract, plus a small waiver fee.

[Gaudette Celly]