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

Identifying RHD Prospects to Acquire (Discussion)


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, John_Guest said:

Hmm...so really rather than fantasize a trade where you're coming up a with a bribe big enough to convince teams to cough up one of the creme de la creme of prospects - a right-handed D - it might make more since to trade for picks in the upcoming draft.

Here's a few I pulled of somebody's top 30 list:

https://www.nhl.com/news/2020-nhl-draft-top-prospects/c-316240380

 

There's also Alex Cotton

Thimo Nickl

 

Helge Grans

 

Mitchell Miller

 

Luke Prokop

 

and so on...

 

What would we have to give up to draft one of those in the upcoming draft? Not as much as the prospects in the OP I'll wager.

I love all your examples (Targets)

 

But the reason we should go after a prospect over a pick, is the certainty of the prospect

 

The prospect has basically passed the 1st hurdle, in that they have been drafted and shown some consistency to their game......

 

Remember Patrick White? Even the fact that a pick may not want to sign........top prospects have been gauged against men, in most cases....

 

That is why I suggested those guys....................

 

I have seen Drydale and he is something for sure....but the others have much more risk to them

 

But it is not that I would turn down the deal.........just not my first choice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Remember Patrick White? Even the fact that a pick may not want to sign........top prospects have been gauged against men, in most cases....

Yes. I also remember Loui Eriksson. Isn't there risk no matter what you do?

You've identified a problem though. Vulnerable on RD. 

The question would be what solution would make the most sense to the Canucks at this point on a risk reward basis. To me, Benning seems to be better on his gambles with draft picks than on trades and they're cheaper. At this time that's the horse I'd back. 

Edited by John_Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Not that I’d do this, but I wonder what a package of Virtanen + rights to Tryamkin wouls fetch us?

Tryamkin’s rights are pretty much worthless.  He’s signed in the KHL this season.  The next NHL season won’t start until Dec and likely won’t end before his rights expire in August.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Just draft our own. Plenty of good (even incredible) dmen have come beyond the 1st round.

Vancouver doesn’t have a 1st or a 2nd in this years draft.  Yes, you can definitely get a very good D in the 3rd round or later, but whoever they draft will be a long term project. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Vancouver doesn’t have a 1st or a 2nd in this years draft.  Yes, you can definitely get a very good D in the 3rd round or later, but whoever they draft will be a long term project. 

Generally, most players are long term projects unless they're top 10 picks. Defensemen are harder to predict on their progression thus why you find gems later on. I'm certainly not expecting any immediate impact RHD. Myers and Tanev can hold the fort, we have Rafferty in the wings and Woo will be starting his development.

 

But to go with the topic, if we were to trade say a Virtanen, I could see us getting someone like Jokiharju.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, John_Guest said:

Yes. I also remember Loui Eriksson. Isn't there risk no matter what you do?

You've identified a problem though. Vulnerable on RD. 

The question would be what solution would make the most sense to the Canucks at this point on a risk reward basis. To me, Benning seems to be better on his gambles with draft picks than on trades and they're cheaper. At this time that's the horse I'd back. 

That is a good question...........and I do agree with your point about Benning drafting

But it is more of a risk I believe

 

RHD just are not that available, unless they are older UFA's who want term..........there is a risk there to..........aka Eriksson

 

Really, our biggest strength is RW, and I think that is what you use to get a good RHD with some pedigree

 

What is the cost......what are we left with?

 

That is why, to some, trading Boeser, and keeping Toffoli, is the better alternative

 

There are some great RHD's who might become available if Boeser was dangled

 

Maybe a Dumba (Minn), maybe Cernak (Tampa), maybe Mayfield (NYI) to name 3..............maybe it is a 3 way deal

 

But the point is........whether is is a draft pick, a prospect or a ready player.......... we need that RHD, we are too small, and too passive

 

I would love to see a Myers/Mayfield/Tryamkin.............would love it!

 

So to all the neigh sayers..................................how do you fix our RHD? Oh, yes! Draft him, and maybe in 3 years, he is ready.........Maybe!

or start all over again........and again maybe he is ready in 6 years................maybe!

 

And you see John....that is why you do not make a player for Pick move..............too much maybe involved, when targeting a particular position

Its way too undependable

 

Plus your guy has to be available near your pick

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, John_Guest said:

Yes. I also remember Loui Eriksson. Isn't there risk no matter what you do?

You've identified a problem though. Vulnerable on RD. 

The question would be what solution would make the most sense to the Canucks at this point on a risk reward basis. To me, Benning seems to be better on his gambles with draft picks than on trades and they're cheaper. At this time that's the horse I'd back. 

Pearson and Miller say hello...what trade has he made that was bad?  Vey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Pearson and Miller say hello...what trade has he made that was bad?  Vey?

It does seem Benning is getting better with his trades, doesn't it? On the other hand if we stop at Gudbranson...

And the court is still out on Toffoli. If it's not possible to re-sign him, Benning doesn't look good. If he does re-sign Toffoli but for whatever reasons that acquisition turns out to be a bust it's doubtful Jim will be forgiven.

But at present I'd have to agree you do seem to be correct. Benning is making better trades and perhaps that is a sign of hope.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, John_Guest said:

It does seem Benning is getting better with his trades, doesn't it? On the other hand if we stop at Gudbranson...

And the court is still out on Toffoli. If it's not possible to re-sign him, Benning doesn't look good. If he does re-sign Toffoli but for whatever reasons that acquisition turns out to be a bust it's doubtful Jim will be forgiven.

But at present I'd have to agree you do seem to be correct. Benning is making better trades and perhaps that is a sign of hope.

Benning looks fine with TT either way.  Sometimes it’s not about what comes back but why the trade was done in the first place.  JB showed a ton of confidence in this group and backed them up like a pro bringing TT in when BB and Markstrom were injured to right the boat.   Doesn’t matter what happened with Covid as nobody would know what would have happened either way despite how things were going at the time.  With both BB and a Markstrom coming back I’m 100% sure we’d have made the playoffs and those 4 wins during those 10 games while TT was here would have been huge in making sure it happened.   To me he was a rental ...  the ONLY part that sucked was he played one entire game so far in the playoffs.   Can’t blame that on JB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was rethinking my impression on bad trades too. I looked it up. I think I may be wrong about Benning and bad earlier trades.

http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/trade_list_by_GM/Jim_Benning/280

I got an impression of bad trades without really thinking about it from things like Goldobin and Dahlen and all the other duds we got, but Jim doesn't often give up much, does he? And the Dahlen trade might turn out to be a thing in our favour. They say Linus Karlsson is developing into a possibility.

Hey, help me out with something. There was one I thought was a trade but maybe it wasn't. Who was that smallish Swedish defenceman we had as a prospect who some say had all kinds of talent? He might even be in the NHL now. I'm blocking on his name.

Edited by John_Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John_Guest said:

I was rethinking my impression on bad trades too. I looked it up. I think I may be wrong about Benning and bad earlier trades.

http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/trade_list_by_GM/Jim_Benning/280

I got an impression of bad trades without really thinking about it from things like Goldobin and Dahlen and all the other duds we got, but Jim doesn't often give up much, does he? And the Dahlen trade might turn out to be a thing in our favour. They say Linus Karlsson is developing into a possibility.

Hey, help me out with something. There was one I thought was a trade but maybe it wasn't. Who was that smallish Swedish defenceman we had as a prospect who some say had all kinds of talent? He might even be in the NHL now. I'm blocking on his name.

Gustavo Forsling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2020 at 5:47 PM, qwijibo said:

Vancouver doesn’t have a 1st or a 2nd in this years draft.  Yes, you can definitely get a very good D in the 3rd round or later, but whoever they draft will be a long term project. 

At this rate, we need some more long term projects with Hughes and Petey getting likely 10.5m contracts each

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/18/2020 at 11:52 AM, John_Guest said:

Oh wait...I remember now. It was Gustav Forsling. We got Adam Clendening for him. Then we gave up Clendening with Bonino for Sutter.

The estrogen levels of HF Canucks skyrocketed when we traded Forsling for Clendening.     The loss of Forsling, Corrado, and McCann caused a lot of sleepless nights for the HF Canuckers.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/28/2020 at 10:16 AM, DarkIndianRises said:

The estrogen levels of HF Canucks skyrocketed when we traded Forsling for Clendening.     The loss of Forsling, Corrado, and McCann caused a lot of sleepless nights for the HF Canuckers.   

Not for me, was just poor management decisions at the time in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...