Next Season Adjustments

[Chickenspear]

8 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Imagine if JB signed Eric Staal instead of LE...Staal would have been the exact player we needed to get us past Vegas...considering LE didn't even play the last few games....opportunity cost is what this is...Staal was available the same year LE signed and Staal signed for 3.5M for 3 years with Minny...coulda, shoulda, woulda.

The thing is, JB was looking for someone to play with the Sedins at the time, they had already shown chemistry with LE internationally, and he was among the top UFAs of that year. I don't feel too upset about the signing, though it didn't turn out, with all the other bad contracts given out that offseason.

 

But yes, I agree. Staal would have been preferable looking back. Cream of that crop.

[Pete M]

8 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Execution of what, passes? 

The flip pass 50/50 play... 

Minor hockey-like exit strategy.

 

I know what you are saying and appreciate you coming to this side of the discussion.
 

In a thread meant to capture our armchair GM recommendations or adjustments, I was starting to wonder if coaching was part of it. 

 

First, I give Vegas full credit as being a nearly perfect enemy for the Canucks to matchup against. 
 

However, once the dust settles, I think analytics will quantify the claims of my *expert eye test, concerning how and where the Canucks’ coaching systems require improvement. 
 

It’s easy to state that goaltending, EP and QH, plus timely Horvat and Miller snipes, was the chewing gum used to hold together the team’s successes, but I’ll leave that for others to pick up through the offseason discussion in here. 
 

Neither fans nor the media will allow anyone to forget how incredibly lopsided some shifts, periods and games were in favour our opponents, which narrative will be soon quantified by stat geeks out there looking to expose the Canucks’ Coach of the Year crap for what it is. 
 

I remember Crawford’s entertaining offensive system having surrendered many odd man rushes against, only to have one of the worst goalies at side to side movement in the net being absolutely destroyed, and Crow not figuring that out, nor did the GM. Same goes for the players, deployment and coaching to those players today, just differently. 
 

For years now, many on here recognized various coaching issues, with the defensive structure being the typical whipping boy, with sprinklings of Newell in there to spell of the Baumer bombs. Where did that all go? I assume the answer has to do with how far the team came, having exceeded expectations, etc. 
 

IMO, it’s interesting to now see claims which first seek new roster pieces, instead of examining coaching. 

 

IMO, yes, definitely it was the luck of having our kid stars and the goaltending which pulled this often dominated team through several series, which may have briefly disguised a lot of the failed tactics of the structure. I don’t believe that upgrading our players is enough to overcome the shortcomings witnessed throughout these playoffs. I believe analytics will show most of what I’m trying to present here, but the coaching will make players look pretty bad, not the other way around, which is a shame not to be able to have a proper venue to fully examine and discuss. 
 

Fix the plan, then bring in players to execute or expect similar results. 

There definitely was a lot of individual play with the Nucks, which amounted to flip and chase....it is amazing how keeping it simple works because simple allows players to execute with speed because players knows where their team mates are on the ice if things are kept simple...KISS principle works in a fast pace sport.

 

Successful hockey is played the same at all levels....the attack, regroup and zone exits all need work...but they need to keep it simple...if the other team adjusts to what they're doing, then they have to know what to do to change it up. For example, if the attack is set up off the rush with the triangle by taking the puck wide over the blueline and the other team starts to stand up at the blueline, then the Nucks need to dump it in and set up their forecheck...the quicker a team can adjust the more advantage it has....another advantage a team can exploit is the opportunities that come from having a quick transition and a quick mind set by transitioning from offense (when a team has possession of the puck) to defense (when a team gives up possession of the puck)...the quicker a team can transition from offense to defense creates opportunities...players need to quickly understand when they have possession they switch to offense (no matter what zone they are in on the ice), and when they don't have the puck, they switch to defense...the quicker they do this the more advantage.

 

or just implement the Pat Quinn way of playing the game, where the D overlaps with the Forwards on the rush and the Forwards overlap with the D on the backcheck...a 5 man system going back and forth up and down the ice....fans only need to watch the 1994 Canucks to see this type of play in action.

[Mackcanuck]

 

[JM_]

3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Yea but what if Demko outplays Marsktrom and we’re still forced to trade him?

 

Also what if teams call our bluff and lowball us because they know it’s their offer or nothing? We’re not going to get more value for him next offseason if we’re going to trade him.
 

we're only forced to if Marky gets a NMC from us that includes expansion protection. No one else on the team has one, so I don't think he's going to get one. I'm OK with it if thats Jim's line in the sand. 

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Unless they offer him more than market value there’s no motivation to both take less and not get expansion protection.

Marky will have to decide if he's ok with still good, but less than market value $ and term (and no protection) to stay on the team that was patient with him/gave him his chance, hired arguably the best goalie coach in the world to work with him, with team full of very solid young players , many of whom he's close to, with a very solid chance of being cup competitive for years. Or he can make a bit more coin elsewhere.

 

That's the motivation (or not).

 

5 hours ago, stawns said:

I dn't disagree and no one needs to sell me on TD. However, this was three games.......if it turns out that he still struggles then it's going to be tough on a young team.  I don't think they can afford ro take a step back

So long as they secure a solid, veteran 1B and make good use of the cap savings elsewhere, I think they'd be fine with little worry of taking a step back.

[Bruce Boudreau]

On 9/5/2020 at 6:34 PM, DeNiro said:

Hard to score when the D can’t move the pucks up to the forwards efficiently.

 

Pretty hard to generate anything when every pass you get is being chipped to you off the glass or being intercepted before it gets to you.

 

Moving the puck quickly up the ice from our own zone is exactly the reason we lost. The D needs at least two high end puck movers before we can contend.

Would Philly bite on dealing Gostisbehere coming off a down year where he was a liability defensively and was healthy scratched a few times?

 

He is signed to a reasonable contract if he can rebound back to being a near 40 point guy could be exactly the offensive puck moving d the Canucks need to take some pressure off Hughes to carry everything while buying Rathbone time to develop instead of throwing him in.

 

Philly could use a young power forward type who could bring some speed and 15-20 goals.

 

Would Virtanen interest Philly? Maybe broad street finally brings out the power forward sideof big Jake more consistently with some new scenery.

 

 

[Nuck1991]

 i think pearson, virtanen, sutter and eriksson have played their last games here. 

 

Pearson just disappeared in vegas series, had no speed and was always getting hit. 

Enuf of jake experiment, better for both parties if he leaves.

Sutter had a decent performance against wild and blues, makes him little east to trade. 

Eriksson, do we really need to talk about this guy? if he has any diginity left he should walk away from that contract

[Patel Bure]

Assuming that the Canucks are “all in” for next season:

 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Toffoli

Hoglander-Gaudette-Podkolzin

Motte-Beagle-MacEwen

 

Roussel

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Juolevi-Tryamkin

 

Benn

 

Demko 

VetBackUp

 

Assumptions:

 

1) 2021 1st as a sweetener to get rid of a bad contract (Eriksson?)

2) Virtanen moved for a low 2020 1st

3) Tryamkin and Podkolzin return in April before the Canucks’ post season starts.

4) Hoglander possibly makes the team next season.

5) Stecher, Leivo, Fantenberg, and Markstrom all let go.  
6) Baertschi trade for a pick at 50% retention

7) Rafferty as a sweetener to move Sutter?

[messier's_elbow]

I noticed Sutter and Roussel both started decent against Minni and St Louis,  but were ineffective against Vegas.  Sutter is decent when healthy, but he’s injury prone and I doubt he can make it through a whole season and playoffs healthy as a 3rd line Center in any year. 

[messier's_elbow]

I wish he would show more with his physical talent, but I’d keep Virtanen unless someone over pays for him. When he matures he will be an Alex Tuch clone. Plus he now has invaluable playoff experience. 

Edited September 8, 2020 by messier's_elbow

[Pickly]

2 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Assuming that the Canucks are “all in” for next season:

 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Toffoli

Hoglander-Gaudette-Podkolzin

Motte-Beagle-MacEwen

 

Roussel

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Juolevi-Tryamkin

 

Benn

 

Demko 

VetBackUp

 

Assumptions:

 

1) 2021 1st as a sweetener to get rid of a bad contract (Eriksson?)

2) Virtanen moved for a low 2020 1st

3) Tryamkin and Podkolzin return in April before the Canucks’ post season starts.

4) Hoglander possibly makes the team next season.

5) Stecher, Leivo, Fantenberg, and Markstrom all let go.  
6) Baertschi trade for a pick at 50% retention

7) Rafferty as a sweetener to move Sutter?

A lot to dissect here.

 

I’m highly against dealing a consecutive first round picks considering there is absolutely no guarantee the Canucks make the playoffs next year and you still need to keep the cupboards stocked for long term sustainability. If you can get a first for Virtanen you absolutely take it and run but I just don’t see it as I don’t think he’s that good and reality is starting to set in as to what type of player he really is.
 

I don’t know what the fascination with Tryamkin is around here I mean he’s a big body and played decent when he was here but he’s 26 and has had opportunity to come back so I think that ship has probably sailed. Furthermore, he’s more of a bottom pairing defenceman anyway what the Canucks need is another top 3 D. 
 

Hoglander is a nice player but I highly doubt he makes the jump from the SHL to the NHL without some seasoning in the A to get familiar with the NA style of game. Fanta also deserves to be here next year as he outplayed Benn all year and showed he’s a perfect 6/7 D at the perfect price. 
 

All in all the Canucks have a lot of work to do this offseason (the most important in recent memory) but I don’t really like the idea of tossing around sweeteners like candy to get rid of multiple bad contracts that Benning himself is guilty for. 

[Patel Bure]

16 minutes ago, Pickly said:

A lot to dissect here.

 

I’m highly against dealing a consecutive first round picks considering there is absolutely no guarantee the Canucks make the playoffs next year and you still need to keep the cupboards stocked for long term sustainability. If you can get a first for Virtanen you absolutely take it and run but I just don’t see it as I don’t think he’s that good and reality is starting to set in as to what type of player he really is.
 

I don’t know what the fascination with Tryamkin is around here I mean he’s a big body and played decent when he was here but he’s 26 and has had opportunity to come back so I think that ship has probably sailed. Furthermore, he’s more of a bottom pairing defenceman anyway what the Canucks need is another top 3 D. 
 

Hoglander is a nice player but I highly doubt he makes the jump from the SHL to the NHL without some seasoning in the A to get familiar with the NA style of game. Fanta also deserves to be here next year as he outplayed Benn all year and showed he’s a perfect 6/7 D at the perfect price. 
 

All in all the Canucks have a lot of work to do this offseason (the most important in recent memory) but I don’t really like the idea of tossing around sweeteners like candy to get rid of multiple bad contracts that Benning himself is guilty for. 

I’m also against the idea of moving two consecutive 1st rounders (hence my Virtanen suggestion before moving Eriksson or Sutter with the 2021 1st.   I think the Kasperi Kapanen trade isn’t a good comparable to Jake, and so I feel that Jake for a first is definitely doable.  
 

I agree with you about Hoglander.   Next year might be a bit difficult.    I agree with you on Fanta but I think Juolevi is ready to make the jump, and finding a taker for Benn might be difficult.   Would definitely be on board with Fanta signing on for another year if we could move Benn however.   
 

I also don’t like the idea of moving sweeteners around which is why I’m hesitant to just causally throw in guys like Rafferty, Rathbone, etc. to get rid of someone like Sutter.  
 

I think the 2021 1st as a sweetener however would catch some attention.   However, I think we definitely need to be in on the 2020 1st however in order to do that.  Two years in a row with missed 1sts is bad business.

[HorvatToBaertschi]

This is my question: now that we have gained a 3 round playoff experience, and that all the players know what it takes to produce during playoff season, are our "foundational" vets still important to the team? By that I mean, do we still need to pay 4.5 mil to a passenger like Sutter now that his ONLY intangible, being experience, has become moot?

 

Beagle obviously stays for such obvious reasons, the guy is a defensive specialist,one of the best faceoff man in the league, blocks shots like crazy and PK's extremely well.

 

Do we still need roussel?

 

Should be a very interesting off-season.

 

I personally want a bottom 6 of :

 

Pearson Gaudette JV

Motte Beagle Roussel

[-DLC-]

 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

If we can get rid of Roussel without sweeteners, then we should: MacEwan is a capable replacement.  Sutter and Pearson's contracts expire at the end of next year:  I'm less inclined to move them except in a hockey deal since I'm not sold on clearing cap space for Toffoli. 

Loui is still the elephant in the room.  His last year at 6 mil overlaps with the first of Petey, Hughes' and Demkos' new contracts.  It's also the last year of the Luongo cap recapture penalty.  That's 9 mil of dead cap space at a time when we'll most need it.  Sure we can probably re-sign them but at the cost of no ufa help during their prime years.  If we can get rid of Loui without a first, Rathbone or Podkolzin in the package then we absolutely have to. 

[Nucker 67]

It sounds like there could be movement, one of Sutter or Eriksson, but it's going to cost the Canucks. My guess is a prospect we may have been hoping to see one day. I'm not sure Benning gives up one of the D (Rathbone, Woo, Juolevi) or Hoglander and Podkolzin

 

Lind, DiPietro or Focht ??

[UKNuck96]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

It sounds like there could be movement, one of Sutter or Eriksson, but it's going to cost the Canucks. My guess is a prospect we may have been hoping to see one day. I'm not sure Benning gives up one of the D (Rathbone, Woo, Juolevi) or Hoglander and Podkolzin

 

Lind, DiPietro or Focht ??

I have a feeling rafferty may be one that’s moved 

[YearoftheNuck]

On 9/6/2020 at 1:53 PM, EddieVedder said:

Boeser has to be used as trade bait.  He has hustle, but hes not a good skater, hes not that great a stick handler and he makes way too many turnovers.  We can't afford to pay a player 5 million just because he sometimes has a good shot.  The good thing is, Vancouver media has hyped him up so much the past 2-3 seasons that we might actually get something valuable for him.  In a year or two, Podkolzin will be able to take his spot anyway

Im hearing Domi is available.  If thats the case, id try to swap him for Boeser.   

Petey has Miller.  Bo needs someone like Domi. 

 

Jake scored 18 goals playing mostly 3rd and 4th line minutes.  As frustrating as he might make some fans, there is no way Benning or Green are giving up an a young18 goal scorer with limited minutes, making close to nothing, 

 

We need Mackewan, maybe Lind, and definitely Joulevi to make big jumps next year.  

 

Id sign Marky and try to use Demko as a big trade chip to get either a goal scoring right winger or a top 2 or 3 dman. 

 

 

 

 

 

Just curious, would you do Dumba for Boeser? I personally would hate to see BB go, but if we could do a multiplayer swap with Minnesota and get Dumba and Greenway back that’d be pretty great. It would address two of our biggest needs; a minute munching skilled RHD and a massive physical winger who can chip in a few points. 

[mll]

28 minutes ago, YearoftheNuck said:

Just curious, would you do Dumba for Boeser? I personally would hate to see BB go, but if we could do a multiplayer swap with Minnesota and get Dumba and Greenway back that’d be pretty great. It would address two of our biggest needs; a minute munching skilled RHD and a massive physical winger who can chip in a few points. 

The Wild are using Dumba to get a centre back.  They are flooded on the wings in the system but have so few Cs.  Their C position is so dire that they are moving wingers to C.  Seems like Guerin is looking for a reliable two-way C - he says Bergeron type C to play on their top line.  

 

Staal is no longer a C1 and has shown his age.  ErikssonEk has no offence and pegs as a C3.  Sturm will probably have to make the team but as a C4.  That's their C-depth for next season.  

It's unlikely that Boeser can even make the same impact in Minnesota as the roster construction doesn't really help him.  They don't have a Pettersson to set Boeser up.  They also don't have a lot of speed in their lineup.  They can't compensate for Boeser' lack of footspeed and there's no one that can set him up.

 

Dumba seems like the wrong type of D to target for Vancouver.  He can be an adventure in his own end.  Dumba benefits from playing with reliable D-partners.  The Wild have their Tanevs' to cover for Dumba's defensive lapses and offensive aggressiveness while the Canucks don't.  

 

Edited September 9, 2020 by mll

[YearoftheNuck]

2 minutes ago, mll said:

The Wild are using Dumba to get a centre back.  They are flooded on the wings in the system but have so few Cs.  Their C position is so dire that they are moving wingers to C.  Seems like Guerin is looking for a reliable two-way C - he says Bergeron type C to play on their top line.  

 

Staal is no longer a C1 and has shown his age.  ErikssonEk has no offence and pegs as a C3.  Sturm will probably have to make the team but as a C4.  That's their C-depth for next season.  

 

Guerin was asked about Donato playing lower in the lineup or in the pressbox and he said that some players have expensive contracts and they will play.  Parise and Zuccarello have long term expensive contracts and both have NMCs.  Sounds like the Wild are going to make sure they are in a position to earn their salaries.  It limits what they can do on the offensive wings.  Kaprizov and Fiala have been identified as line drivers - they are the guys they are building around.  

 

It's unlikely that Boeser can even make the same impact in Minnesota as the roster construction doesn't really help him.  They don't have a Pettersson to set Boeser up.  They also don't have a lot of speed in their lineup.  They can't compensate for Boeser' lack of footspeed and there's no one that can set him up.

 

Dumba seems like the wrong type of D to target for Vancouver.  He can be an adventure in his own end.  Dumba benefits from playing with reliable D-partners.  The Wild have their Tanevs' to cover for Dumba's defensive lapses and offensive aggressiveness while the Canucks don't.  

Thank you for your insight. You really know the Wild. 
 

I’ve felt that BB’s value would be quite high in Minnesota with him being a hometown hero, but you’re right, maybe that wouldn’t be the best fit for him.