[proposal] Gaudette + one of Juolevi or Rathbone as a sweetener

[Patel Bure]

[proposal] Gaudette + one of Juolevi or Rathbone as a sweetener

 

Gaudette + one of Rathbone or Juolevi should be a good enough sweetener to get rid of a significantly bad contract should it not?   

Move Gaudette and roll with Sutter and Beagle as your bottom 6 centers.  

With Hughes here, the Canucks don’t need both of Juolevi and Rathbone on that left side.  Only one of those guys needs to develop into a 2nd pairing guy for us.   Just get a cheap vet on the 3rd pairing LD in the future.

 

Future:

Hughes-xxx
OJ or Rathbone-xxx
CheapVet-xxx

 

Use the freed up cap space to try and work something out with Tampa for Cernak.  
 

All I know is that the Canucks absolutely CANNOT roll with Myers, Benn, Chatfield, and Rafferty as your RD’s next season.  Hamonic Has terrible underlying numbers and guys like him tend to age drastically without a moments notice.  Vatanen might be a nice option but he’s also fairly injury prone these days.  Maybe Martinez out of Vegas if Pietrangelo signs with Vegas, or even offer sheeting someone like McKenzie Weegar.  

Edited October 11, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Nuxfanabroad]

What's the rush, DIR? We're finally cap-compliant, with loads falling away in the next 2 off-seasons. THEN, we can get a lil' crazy.

 

I'm actually looking forward to seeing some younger mugs havin' a go...

[BlastPast]

No.

[Patel Bure]

6 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

What's the rush, DIR? We're finally cap-compliant, with loads falling away in the next 2 off-seasons. THEN, we can get a lil' crazy.

 

I'm actually looking forward to seeing some younger mugs havin' a go...

I’m all for pushing the young guys if they’re ready as well, but they need to be insulated.  What good does it do Demko if you’re trying to get him to take the next step with 50/50 duty, playing behind an AHL calibre defense?   
 

You also do no justice to guys like Rafferty and Chatfield by forcing them into roles that they may not be able to handle.

 

I’m not a fan of the idea of signing Hamonic or Vatanen, but it might have to come down to that.  
 

I’m perfectly okay with guys like Chatfield and Rafferty being used as 7th dmen that fill in when injuries hit, but anything more than that and you’re setting them up to fail.

 

When a kid learns to ride a bike, you give him training wheels.  You don’t put him on a motorbike.

Edited October 11, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Nuxfanabroad]

3 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I’m all for pushing the young guys if they’re ready as well, but they need to be insulated.  What good does it do Demko if you’re trying to get him to take the next step with 50/50 duty, playing behind an AHL calibre defense?   
 

You also do no justice to guys like Rafferty and Chatfield by forcing them into roles that they may not be able to handle.

 

I’m not a fan of the idea of signing Hamonic or Vatanen, but it might have to come down to that.  
 

I’m perfectly okay with guys like Chatfield and Rafferty being used as 7th dmen that fill in when injuries hit, but anything more than that and you’re setting them up to fail.

 

When a kid learns to ride a bike, you give him training wheels.  You don’t put him on a motorbike.

Fair enough..& do imagine we'll add a vet or two. Hell, I'd be fine with Fanta back.

 

But I'd prefer my Van/OTT trade from yesterday. Guessing owners don't wanna shell out that much tho? If we get Nikita back, we'll be golden!

[Patel Bure]

23 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Fair enough..& do imagine we'll add a vet or two. Hell, I'd be fine with Fanta back.

 

But I'd prefer my Van/OTT trade from yesterday. Guessing owners don't wanna shell out that much tho? If we get Nikita back, we'll be golden!

Is there any chance that Tryamkin can come back for this season?   If so - then yeah, I’d definitely feel a lot more comfortable.   

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I’m all for pushing the young guys if they’re ready as well, but they need to be insulated.  What good does it do Demko if you’re trying to get him to take the next step with 50/50 duty, playing behind an AHL calibre defense?   
 

You also do no justice to guys like Rafferty and Chatfield by forcing them into roles that they may not be able to handle.

 

I’m not a fan of the idea of signing Hamonic or Vatanen, but it might have to come down to that.  
 

I’m perfectly okay with guys like Chatfield and Rafferty being used as 7th dmen that fill in when injuries hit, but anything more than that and you’re setting them up to fail.

 

When a kid learns to ride a bike, you give him training wheels.  You don’t put him on a motorbike.

 

Both those guys are veteran defensemen. What's your take on these two?

[Patel Bure]

17 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

 

Both those guys are veteran defensemen. What's your take on these two?

While I like the fact that the presence of either Vatanen or Hamonic would insulate and protect the development of our young guys (ie Rafferty or Chatfield as our 7th dman that can play higher when inevitable injuries hit), I’m kind of “meh” on both vets.

 

Vatanen is not the player that he once was and is becoming injury prone like Tanev.    
 

Hamonic has terrible underlying numbers and while he plays very physical and blocks shots, those kinds of players tend to decline very drastically without notice.  Signing Hamonic could be risky.   
 

Benning might just be better off whipping out the knee pads and calling Arizona’s GM again to accept Arizona’s proposal.

[Smashian Kassian]

I'd hold on to Juolevi/Rathbone. We need defenseman right now - Juolevi will be on our team & Rathbone could be a player too.

 

Gaudette/Virtanen are the chips I'd look to play. Then sign someone better suited to the third line than Gaud. Some C's still available:

 

Mikeal Granlund

Soderberg

Namestnikov

Athanasiou

Haula

Richardson

Brassard

Galchenyuk

 

I really think Turris would've been a good target, but basically a signing of that ilk. 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Smashian Kassian

[Patel Bure]

26 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I'd hold on to Juolevi/Rathbone. We need defenseman right now - Juolevi will be on our team & Rathbone could be a player too.

 

Gaudette/Virtanen are the chips I'd look to play. Then sign someone better suited to the third line than Gaud. Some C's still available:

 

Mikeal Granlund

Soderberg

Namestnikov

Athanasiou

Haula

Richardson

Brassard

Galchenyuk

 

I really think Turris would've been a good target, but basically a signing of that ilk. 

 

 

I originally would have been on board with moving Virtanen, but with Toffoli out of the picture now, the Canucks will need to hold on to both Boeser and Virtanen in my opinion.

 

It's unfortunate, but it's starting to look more and more like the Canucks will get their tonsils obliterated this coming season.      

[Phil_314]

Gaudette alone for Loui with no retention?  Maybe.  

Not adding Juolevi or Rathbone.  

[Patel Bure]

14 minutes ago, Phil_314 said:

Gaudette alone for Loui with no retention?  Maybe.  

Not adding Juolevi or Rathbone.  

Is Gaudette with Loui with no retention realistic however?   Would any team bite on that?   I’m not so sure.  If there were takers however, I’d definitely be all over that.  
 

Roll with Sutter and Beagle as your centers, and then find a cheap 3rd line C in the next off-season (or evening try and bring back Sutter at pennies on the dollar).

Edited October 11, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Ballisticsports.]

4 hours ago, BlastPast said:

No.

I agree

Sweeteners sound sour to me

Trading valuable assets in a cap dump is not what a team just coming out of the basement should be doing. If a team in the Canucks position is looking to trade picks and prospects, it’s going to be in exchange for other assets

[JeremyCuddles]

2 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

Gaudette alone for Loui with no retention?  Maybe.  

Not adding Juolevi or Rathbone.  

A guy that struggles physically and defensively and arguably offensively is enough to convince a team to take 2 years of Eriksson at 6mil? I need some of what you're smoking/drinking. That's some potent stuff.

[Phil_314]

11 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

A guy that struggles physically and defensively and arguably offensively is enough to convince a team to take 2 years of Eriksson at 6mil? I need some of what you're smoking/drinking. That's some potent stuff.

LOL.  There's a little thing called upside and being cost controlled that might factor in (do you even know what 10.2c means?)
Also, holy broad brush you're painting with Batman.  33 points in 59 games = struggling offensively?  I'll have what you're having.
Coach may not have trusted him over two-way guys in the playoffs e.g. Sutter but that doesn't mean he's not an NHL player.
If you look in the past, lesser albeit blue-chip prospects have been used as sweeteners, and we're talking about a depth scorer.    

Edited October 11, 2020 by Phil_314

[PhillipBlunt]

17 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

[proposal] Gaudette + one of Juolevi or Rathbone as a sweetener

 

Gaudette + one of Rathbone or Juolevi should be a good enough sweetener to get rid of a significantly bad contract should it not?   

Move Gaudette and roll with Sutter and Beagle as your bottom 6 centers.  

With Hughes here, the Canucks don’t need both of Juolevi and Rathbone on that left side.  Only one of those guys needs to develop into a 2nd pairing guy for us.   Just get a cheap vet on the 3rd pairing LD in the future.

 

Future:

Hughes-xxx
OJ or Rathbone-xxx
CheapVet-xxx

 

Use the freed up cap space to try and work something out with Tampa for Cernak.  
 

All I know is that the Canucks absolutely CANNOT roll with Myers, Benn, Chatfield, and Rafferty as your RD’s next season.  Hamonic Has terrible underlying numbers and guys like him tend to age drastically without a moments notice.  Vatanen might be a nice option but he’s also fairly injury prone these days.  Maybe Martinez out of Vegas if Pietrangelo signs with Vegas, or even offer sheeting someone like McKenzie Weegar.  

The only way that would be palatable, is if it is part of a plan to land Pietrangelo and Toffoli in free agency. I’d gladly let go of Virtanen instead of Gaudette though. 

[Patel Bure]

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

The only way that would be palatable, is if it is part of a plan to land Pietrangelo and Toffoli in free agency. I’d gladly let go of Virtanen instead of Gaudette though. 

I think Toffoli is done here to be honest.   
 

I also don’t think Benning will go after AP since he’ll need to keep as much cap space open as possible in order to re-up Pettersson and Hughes.  
 

I suspect that if Benning does bring in another defenseman, it will be a stay at home type of guy that has one year left on his contract (ie  a Kris Russell or Jason Demers type via trading of a lower round draft pick).  
 

Obviously - Benning will have a greater idea of his cap once the Virtanen arbitration gets settled.

 

As of right now, I think our team will be as follows:

 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Eriksson

Roussel-Gaudette-Virtanen

Motte-Beagle-MacEwen

 

Sutter or Ferland.   

 

Hughes-Myers

Edler-Rafferty

Juolevi-Benn

 

Chatfield

 

Demko

Holtby

 

1) maybe a low round pick gets moved for a vet RD UFA on a one year deal (ie Demers type guy)

 

2) There’s a small chance that maybe Benning puts Baertschi on the team and then trades Pearson for a #4 RD on a one year deal (Demers or Russell type guy).   
 

3) I believe that Edler will be used to mentor Rafferty in a similar way to how Tanev was mentoring Hughes.  
 

Speaking of our defense for next season, as it stands:

 

Hughes-Myers

Edler-Rafferty

[Juolevi or Rathbone]-Benn
 

Chatfield

 

I will admit that I’m fairly impressed by the number of PMD’s that we will have back there.   Each of those pairings will have a guy that will be able to make a strong first pass.  
 

The only question is if Edler, Myers, Benn, and Chatfield will be enough to take on those tough defensive assignments?   
 

If not, then that’s when I think Benning will make one of those ‘Demers or Kris Russell’ type moves.  
 

One thing that I didn’t expect Benning to do in this off-season was in really committing to his prospect pool.  I had originally assumed that he’d be a little more laissez-fair in terms of using sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts but he hasn’t done that at all (which can be chalked up as a good thing).    
 

At some point however, I do think Benning will need to figure out that left side for the long term.

 

Hughes-xxx

Edler-xxx

[Juolevi or Rathbone]-xxx

Tryamkin will also come back either next season or even as early as this season when the season in Russia ends.  Tryamkin will be needed due to his size and ability to kill penalties.  
 

Tryamkin can be moved to the right side, but will Juolevi be able to fill the shoes of Edler when Edler becomes a UFA, or would the Canucks need to sign Edler again?

 

Future:

 

Hughes-Myers

Rathbone-Tryamkin

Juolevi-[Chatfield or Rafferty?]

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Lazurus]

21 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

[proposal] Gaudette + one of Juolevi or Rathbone as a sweetener

 

Gaudette + one of Rathbone or Juolevi should be a good enough sweetener to get rid of a significantly bad contract should it not?   

Move Gaudette and roll with Sutter and Beagle as your bottom 6 centers.  

With Hughes here, the Canucks don’t need both of Juolevi and Rathbone on that left side.  Only one of those guys needs to develop into a 2nd pairing guy for us.   Just get a cheap vet on the 3rd pairing LD in the future.

 

Future:

Hughes-xxx
OJ or Rathbone-xxx
CheapVet-xxx

 

Use the freed up cap space to try and work something out with Tampa for Cernak.  
 

All I know is that the Canucks absolutely CANNOT roll with Myers, Benn, Chatfield, and Rafferty as your RD’s next season.  Hamonic Has terrible underlying numbers and guys like him tend to age drastically without a moments notice.  Vatanen might be a nice option but he’s also fairly injury prone these days.  Maybe Martinez out of Vegas if Pietrangelo signs with Vegas, or even offer sheeting someone like McKenzie Weegar.  

To get a really good defense man for the future, two way defence man not Hughes, a trade has to be quality for quality or taking back a huge bad contract.

Otherwise offer sheets

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by Lazurus