[PGT] St. Louis Blues at Vancouver Canucks | Jan. 27, 2020

[riffraff]

48 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

I thought Gaudette was having a tough time with the puck last night.  Hoping he can turn it around which will hopefully benefit BB.

 

As far as BB goes, I think down the road you could move him only because Hoglander/Podkolzin/Lind/ might be able to step into a scoring role.  But until then you definitely keep him

So much sense you could roll it up and smoke it. 

[Smashian Kassian]

4 hours ago, EdgarM said:

Remember the WCE line? The Sedin's and Burrows Line? In a word ; CHEMISTRY! You might be seeing the next one developing as we speak. 

I called this the first time that Jake was put on that line for a short spell. 

I know that the line was pretty good before(with Boes), but somehow I think they improved on that. As crazy as it seems. 

 

4 hours ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Agreed:  Brock will be off the 3rd line sooner or later.  Jake has been excellent on the 1st but also made the 3rd line jump in ways that Brock hasn't.  I'm wondering if at some point we don't see both of Jake and Brock with Petterson and Miller taking Eriksson's place on the second line if they start losing the momentum they have atm.  Jake seems to be learning a lot from Miller and can do much of what he does, plus.  Having two players like that on different lines would be major.

 

I'm thinking of Jake & Petey as more of a Kesler / Burrows type thing. Remember every once in awhile when they had someone else they could put with the Twins (Hansen/Samuelsson/exc.) They would bump Burr down to play with Kes, who he also had good chemistry with, to give the lineup a spark or a different look. Spread it out more perhaps. I could see that kinda thing here with Jake.

 

I know Jake has played well lately, but I'm not ready to say he's a better player on that line than Boeser, or a better player than Boeser overall. That line was on fire early in the year (one of the most productive in the NHL) & Boeser has proven chemistry with Pettersson. 

 

Jake just looks better overall. He looked good on the third line, he's looked great on the first line, he's just become a better player. I think he could provide a spark on any line at any given time playing the way he is. I almost wonder what he might look like playing alongside Pearson & Bo.

 

 

2 hours ago, Elias_Pettersson said:

Honestly unless Boeser returns to rookie form I can see him being traded in the near future. Green isn’t his biggest fan and I think a lot of that has to do with his skating. He’s just not fast enough to get his shots off anymore like he used to and when he does it has nowhere near the same power or accuracy. I think the back and all his wrist injuries/surgeries have done a number on him. Maybe after another hard offseason of training he’ll get what made him great back, but I just don’t see his skating improving much and the league just keeps getting faster and faster. That’s another reason why JV is having so much success in his spot. 

 

But he's more well rounded player, and up until he got bumped down he's been more productive aswell? This imply's he's gotten significantly worse. I don't know if thats the case.
 

He's hasn't been the dangerous individual goal scorer he was (even tho he still scored 26 last year & is on pace for 26 again this year), but his game in other areas has gotten better & he's still been productive.

 

I think he's probably lacking some confidence in his shot & also maybe he didn't feel like he needed to be the individual trigger man with how well Miller/Pettersson have played.

 

If 26 goals & 65-70 points (pace) is a 'down year', a.k.a the last two, I think we'll be in great shape when he finds his shooting confidence. And the fact he's improved his game elsewhere & still been good while his goal scoring isn't totally on is a big positive.

 

I think trading him for 'fair value' now would be a mistake.

 

1 hour ago, stawns said:

No, because he's a very valuable chip that could be used to fill a weakness somewhere else.  If Jake can play top 6, consistently, then BB very much is in play, imo.

 

It's just business Fredo

He's also very valuable to our team. If you trade Brock your out a great top 6 FWD. I don't view our winger situation as a surplus right now. Ferland & Leivo are injured/question marks, Eriksson isn't the answer, Podkolzin/Hoglander/Lind aren't yet ready (probably won't be for atleast another full year+). 

 

Before Jake took off we had Eriksson/Leivo has top 6 staples, lets not forget the revolving door of wingers Horvat's had. Some stability in our top 6 wouldn't be bad. We have decent depth at defense & center right now.   

[Devron]

57 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

I thought Gaudette was having a tough time with the puck last night.  Hoping he can turn it around which will hopefully benefit BB.

 

As far as BB goes, I think down the road you could move him only because Hoglander/Podkolzin/Lind/ might be able to step into a scoring role.  But until then you definitely keep him

And by that time a guy like Pearson could be gone. Who fills that roll? Top 6 left winger. One could go on and on but I makes 0 sense to trade Boes anytime soon

[lmm]

3 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

The people that are wanting to trade Demko are about as knowledgeable as the ones that think he should be a starter next year. Not everything is black and white. 
 

Draft position means nothing. Super stoked for Jake btw

 

Boeser is signed for another 3 years, a very reasonable contract btw so why even talk about a NTC.

I can't speak for those talking about moving Demko, I think that they are mostly worried about the expansion draft. 

I don't think it is a terrible idea, but I am not for dumping either Brock or Denko.

As you can see from the quote below, there is a faction  on this board that only want to trade bad players. This has been going on at least since, "Ballard, Raymond + a 2nd" . More recently it is Ericksson, Schaller + a B prospect. The reality is those deals do not come around very often. If they do, you grab it, but chances are the other GM gets fired within a week.

I always go back to the Dr Mark Recchi for Rick Tocchet trade. More realistic in my view, 2 good players that bring something different. Actually that trade is not much different than trading Jake for Brock.

For what its worth look at the Tocchet trade list, they guy was traded 5 times and always for good players.

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=5417

 

to your final point, because either you eventually move on from good players or you sign them for too long and too much and get stuck with them as happened at the end of the Sedin era. And I am not talking only about the Sedins, but the entire D and Kesler, Higgins, Luongo, Burrows, Hansen.

 

41 minutes ago, bree2 said:

I don't think you move a player who has been good for us, 

 

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I'm thinking of Jake & Petey as more of a Kesler / Burrows type thing. Remember every once in awhile when they had someone else they could put with the Twins (Hansen/Samuelsson/exc.) They would bump Burr down to play with Kes, who he also had good chemistry with, to give the lineup a spark or a different look. Spread it out more perhaps. I could see that kinda thing here with Jake.

 

I know Jake has played well lately, but I'm not ready to say he's a better player on that line than Boeser, or a better player than Boeser overall. That line was on fire early in the year (one of the most productive in the NHL) & Boeser has proven chemistry with Pettersson. 

 

Jake just looks better overall. He looked good on the third line, he's looked great on the first line, he's just become a better player. I think he could provide a spark on any line at any given time playing the way he is. I almost wonder what he might look like playing alongside Pearson & Bo.

 

 

 

But he's more well rounded player, and up until he got bumped down he's been more productive aswell? This imply's he's gotten significantly worse. I don't know if thats the case.
 

He's hasn't been the dangerous individual goal scorer he was (even tho he still scored 26 last year & is on pace for 26 again this year), but his game in other areas has gotten better & he's still been productive.

 

I think he's probably lacking some confidence in his shot & also maybe he didn't feel like he needed to be the individual trigger man with how well Miller/Pettersson have played.

 

If 26 goals & 65-70 points (pace) is a 'down year', a.k.a the last two, I think we'll be in great shape when he finds his shooting confidence. And the fact he's improved his game elsewhere & still been good while his goal scoring isn't totally on is a big positive.

 

I think trading him for 'fair value' now would be a mistake.

 

He's also very valuable to our team. If you trade Brock your out a great top 6 FWD. I don't view our winger situation as a surplus right now. Ferland & Leivo are injured/question marks, Eriksson isn't the answer, Podkolzin/Hoglander/Lind aren't yet ready (probably won't be for atleast another full year+). 

 

Before Jake took off we had Eriksson/Leivo has top 6 staples, lets not forget the revolving door of wingers Horvat's had. Some stability in our top 6 wouldn't be bad. We have decent depth at defense & center right now.   

No argument here, and I don't think this is something that would happen this season, though I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen with a young(ish) top 4 dman. 

 

However, I could see something happening at the draft, to regain a first in this draft.  I'd bet he'd fetch a #6-12 overall and a good #5 dman..........I'd have a hard time being ok with JB passing on that.  

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, lmm said:

I can't speak for those talking about moving Demko, I think that they are mostly worried about the expansion draft. 

I don't think it is a terrible idea, but I am not for dumping either Brock or Denko.

As you can see from the quote below, there is a faction  on this board that only want to trade bad players. This has been going on at least since, "Ballard, Raymond + a 2nd" . More recently it is Ericksson, Schaller + a B prospect. The reality is those deals do not come around very often. If they do, you grab it, but chances are the other GM gets fired within a week.

I always go back to the Dr Mark Recchi for Rick Tocchet trade. More realistic in my view, 2 good players that bring something different. Actually that trade is not much different than trading Jake for Brock.

For what its worth look at the Tocchet trade list, they guy was traded 5 times and always for good players.

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=5417

 

to your final point, because either you eventually move on from good players or you sign them for too long and too much and get stuck with them as happened at the end of the Sedin era. And I am not talking only about the Sedins, but the entire D and Kesler, Higgins, Luongo, Burrows, Hansen.

 

 

therein lies the problem..........the point of a trade is to improve your team and you don't get something good for something bad.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

1 hour ago, spur1 said:

I noticed a couple of games before Jake was moved up that Brock was playing with a taped up wrist.Also noticed last night on the power play they had Brock in a tap/tip in spot and setup man as opposed to his usual shooter spot 

We really have to take this into account.  Brock's had wrist issues for quite a while and none of us is likely to know the full story on what's going on there.  It stands to reason it's affecting his shot though.  Management will undoubtedly assess whether he can return to being the sniper he once was.  In the mean time, he's becoming a complete player.  It could be a whole lot worse. 

[Devron]

15 minutes ago, lmm said:

I can't speak for those talking about moving Demko, I think that they are mostly worried about the expansion draft. 

I don't think it is a terrible idea, but I am not for dumping either Brock or Denko.

As you can see from the quote below, there is a faction  on this board that only want to trade bad players. This has been going on at least since, "Ballard, Raymond + a 2nd" . More recently it is Ericksson, Schaller + a B prospect. The reality is those deals do not come around very often. If they do, you grab it, but chances are the other GM gets fired within a week.

I always go back to the Dr Mark Recchi for Rick Tocchet trade. More realistic in my view, 2 good players that bring something different. Actually that trade is not much different than trading Jake for Brock.

For what its worth look at the Tocchet trade list, they guy was traded 5 times and always for good players.

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=5417

 

to your final point, because either you eventually move on from good players or you sign them for too long and too much and get stuck with them as happened at the end of the Sedin era. And I am not talking only about the Sedins, but the entire D and Kesler, Higgins, Luongo, Burrows, Hansen.

 

 

This is consuming me a bit here and has pissed me off so I am out after this post and am going to focus my Canucks love for tomorrow’s games

 

i appreciate the post and what you are getting at but this trade thing is silly because well We’ve been screaming for goals for years now. And We are getting there. People are talking like we’ve been to the post season the last couple years. Well we haven't and the team is pretty early in shaping up to what it could be. What happens in the next few years is somewhat irrelevant. In a couple years and Boesers RFA is coming up sure let’s talk. But literally just barely first in our division in how many years and we are talking about trading Boes. It’s non sense 

[Smashian Kassian]

17 minutes ago, stawns said:

No argument here, and I don't think this is something that would happen this season, though I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen with a young(ish) top 4 dman. 

 

However, I could see something happening at the draft, to regain a first in this draft.  I'd bet he'd fetch a #6-12 overall and a good #5 dman..........I'd have a hard time being ok with JB passing on that.  

 

Really? Maybe if its #6 or #7. If its 10 or beyond I wouldn't be happy with that.

 

At about 10 & back the prospects aren't guarantees to play let alone have Boeser's upside. I don't think a #5 D makes up the difference. We still have Benn under contract, Fantenberg who could be re-signed, then Juolevi & Rafferty who could maybe be that next year.

 

A younger top 4 D on the otherhand, I'd look at. If you move Boeser for multiple (meaning lesser) pieces thats a significant step back for the organization IMO. Boeser's strong down low & can score in different ways. He could be a guy you win with. 

 

I know you may feel different. But for me Boeser is 100% in the plan & apart of the core moving forward. It would take someone to knock our socks off to consider it. You could say capspace is a concern but I'd be looking elsewhere to find it first. 

 

 

[189lb enforcers?]

If TD can land the Canucks another great, ripe D prospect, I’d trade him without hesitation. 

 

Goaltenders are relatively easy to source via Free Agency, so I’ve never been a fan of drafting them with top picks or spending too much developmental time on them as kids, hoping they make the jump. 

 

I used to pitch an Evan Bouchard for Demko trade on here. 

The responses were similar to my Horvat for B. Tkachuk proposal during that same time. 

 

I’d still do the Demko for Bouchard trade, but I’m not sure Edmonton is as desperate for a decent, young goalie as they once were.

 

No knock on Demko here, he’s been fantastic and a pleasure to watch, but big, mobile, scoring Dmen are increasingly rare and Edler, Tanev, Myers and Benn are not necessarily going to be replaced by the depth-depth Dmen in Utica, IMO. Here’s hoping that both OJ and Woo beat the odds. 

Edited January 29, 2020 by 189lb enforcers?

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Really? Maybe if its #6 or #7. If its 10 or beyond I wouldn't be happy with that.

 

At about 10 & back the prospects aren't guarantees to play let alone have Boeser's upside. I don't think a #5 D makes up the difference. We still have Benn under contract, Fantenberg who could be re-signed, then Juolevi & Rafferty who could maybe be that next year.

 

A younger top 4 D on the otherhand, I'd look at. If you move Boeser for multiple (meaning lesser) pieces thats a significant step back for the organization IMO. Boeser's strong down low & can score in different ways. He could be a guy you win with. 

 

I know you may feel different. But for me Boeser is 100% in the plan & apart of the core moving forward. It would take someone to knock our socks off to consider it. You could say capspace is a concern but I'd be looking elsewhere to find it first. 

 

 

I agree #6-10 and probably a 4-5 guy.  I do see it differently than you..........I just don't see Boes as an impact player, he's just not a good enough skater.  I do feel like his value is going to start to diminsh in the next year and they'd be wise to give real consideration on selling high on BB.  A top 10 pick, at this point, would be huge for the organization.

[48MPHSlapShot]

7 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Really? Maybe if its #6 or #7. If its 10 or beyond I wouldn't be happy with that.

 

At about 10 & back the prospects aren't guarantees to play let alone have Boeser's upside. I don't think a #5 D makes up the difference. We still have Benn under contract, Fantenberg who could be re-signed, then Juolevi & Rafferty who could maybe be that next year.

 

A younger top 4 D on the otherhand, I'd look at. If you move Boeser for multiple (meaning lesser) pieces thats a significant step back for the organization IMO. Boeser's strong down low & can score in different ways. He could be a guy you win with. 

 

I know you may feel different. But for me Boeser is 100% in the plan & apart of the core moving forward. It would take someone to knock our socks off to consider it. You could say capspace is a concern but I'd be looking elsewhere to find it first. 

 

 

Agreed 100%. Moving star players for lesser pieces is a surefire way to to shoot a rebuild in the foot. It amuses me that Boeser goes a few games without a point and suddenly he's useless when the fact that this is the longest stretch he's ever gone without a point is a testament to his incredible consistency. 

 

Canuck fans are spoiled now. 

[Angry Goose]

39 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

And by that time a guy like Pearson could be gone. Who fills that roll? Top 6 left winger. One could go on and on but I makes 0 sense to trade Boes anytime soon

I'm not saying move him anytime soon.  When his current contract is up, where the team is cap wise and how the depth chart is doing is what I was considering if you might need to move him.  This coming from a homer who never wants to see any player that battles for the Canucks traded.

 

50 minutes ago, riffraff said:

So much sense you could roll it up and smoke it. 

Snoochie Boochies

[I.Am.Ironman]

4 hours ago, Darius said:

Not directing this at you in particular Ironman, just general observations.

 

I think its too early in the line swap (BB to the third and JV to the first line) to make any definite conclusions about JV's contribution vs BB's contribution on that first line.

 

Boeser came in as a calder candidate without EP, without JT. There was a time when even Bo was injured and BB kept producing.   Sometimes i get the feeling that BB doesnt get enough respect.  His playmaking skills are overlooked and he has showed  (to me ) that he processes the game at a higher level than JV does. 

 

Boeser's potential cant be judged from his production on that third line.  Gaudette is fairly inexperienced, still has lots of holes to fix in his game, and Rouss is a decent player but certainly not a guy thats gonna light it up.  All of those elements in addition to the fact that he gets reduced ice time now will amount to a reduction in his production.   Hell, put EP with Gaudette and Roussel...will he still be a ppg player?

 

I do agree with the above post that the adversity that comes with this new assignment may help Boeser in the long run.

 

I agree with all of that, I am in no way trying to take anything away from him. BB is an under rated passer and to use a bball term, he 'sees the floor well'. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Brock and Loui or Virtanen switched at some point during this road trip.

 

I just can't not notice that I haven't seen a boeser flat out beat a goalie on a shot in a year. He would do it regularly during his rookie year but he hasn't done it yet this year. Hopefully he finds that part of his game again, but he has greatly improved his passing and defensive skills over the last couple of seasons.

Edited January 29, 2020 by I.Am.Ironman
Grammar.

[Smashian Kassian]

19 minutes ago, stawns said:

I agree #6-10 and probably a 4-5 guy.  I do see it differently than you..........I just don't see Boes as an impact player, he's just not a good enough skater.  I do feel like his value is going to start to diminsh in the next year and they'd be wise to give real consideration on selling high on BB.  A top 10 pick, at this point, would be huge for the organization.

 

I think he makes up for his skating with his IQ & strength in the tough areas. I think he still has bigger seasons in him, in the not too distant future, therefore I don't think his value will begin to diminish next year.

 

I know your not just pulling this opinion out b/c he got bumped down the lineup, I think we've had these discussions before. So A2D for sure.

[Darius]

1 minute ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

I agree with all of that, I am in no way trying to take anything away from him. BB is an under rated passer and to use a bball term, he 'sees the floor well'. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Brock and Loui or Virtanen switched at some point during this road trip.

 

I just can't not notice that I haven't seen a boeser flat out beat a goalie on a shot in a year. He would do it regularly during his rookie year but he hasn't done it yet this year. Hopefully he finds that part of his game again, but he has greatly improved his passing and defensive skills over the last couple of seasons.

Agree about the shot.  We haven’t seen that laser wrist shot for a while.  I suspect he may be trying to shoot differently , maybe giving his wrist a chance to recover... pure speculating here .. 

[Smashian Kassian]

17 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Agreed 100%. Moving star players for lesser pieces is a surefire way to to shoot a rebuild in the foot. It amuses me that Boeser goes a few games without a point and suddenly he's useless when the fact that this is the longest stretch he's ever gone without a point is a testament to his incredible consistency. 

 

Canuck fans are spoiled now. 

I do think Stawns had his doubts about Boeser for awhile. Otherwise I agree, feels like Boeser has become an unjust whipping boy to some.

I'm with you, I think he's a pillar of what we're building. Only his 3rd year after dealing with injuries troubles the first 2. I think his confidence isn't quite where it was as a rookie, but he's got character & he's a guy you can win with. He's still young. 

[ShawnAntoski]

40 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

This is consuming me a bit here and has pissed me off so I am out after this post and am going to focus my Canucks love for tomorrow’s games

 

i appreciate the post and what you are getting at but this trade thing is silly because well We’ve been screaming for goals for years now. And We are getting there. People are talking like we’ve been to the post season the last couple years. Well we haven't and the team is pretty early in shaping up to what it could be. What happens in the next few years is somewhat irrelevant. In a couple years and Boesers RFA is coming up sure let’s talk. But literally just barely first in our division in how many years and we are talking about trading Boes. It’s non sense 

Ditto, the team is still evolving and still learning to win as a team (the other benefit of Miller coming in from Tampa).  Similar to the Blues, the team seems to be, playing together and standing up for each - the team chemistry is fun to watch.   Still alot of games left and hopefully, JB will only add after exhausting any solutions from within the organization.   

Edited January 29, 2020 by ShawnAntoski

[Ghostsof1915]

Why is it when the team is doing well everyone wants to trade players and tinker? 

[48MPHSlapShot]

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I do think Stawns had his doubts about Boeser for awhile. Otherwise I agree, feels like Boeser has become an unjust whipping boy to some.

I'm with you, I think he's a pillar of what we're building. Only his 3rd year after dealing with injuries troubles the first 2. I think his confidence isn't quite where it was as a rookie, but he's got character & he's a guy you can win with. He's still young. 

The fact is that he's still just 22 as well. If Virtanen, who's a year older, can develop into a top 6 forward, then Boeser can surely further develop his game as well. I'm not going to sit here and say that he's looked amazing this season. There are certainly times where he's been a passenger on that top line. Perhaps some time on a different line with a couple of less offensively gifted players will help mold him into more of a play driver. 

 

Just for some context, the Sedins were just figuring out how to be legitimate top 6 players at the point in their careers Boeser is now, and Boeser has already been a legit top 6 for years. Same situation with Kesler. So to think that Boes is done developing is an asinine thought. 

 

All of this is being compounded by the fact that Eriksson seems to have actually remembered how to play hockey. Folks have short memories, and seem to be forgetting that for 9/10ths of his tenure here, Eriksson has been next to useless. He's no long term solution. 

 

The only way I move Boeser is if it's for above market value. If we can nab that young, top pairing right D we desperately need, then I'll concede that it may be the correct course of action, but barring that, Boeser has most certainly done enough to be granted the benefit of the doubt when he's not performing up to his standard.