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

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Just a qestion, but if we offered our 2021-9th + 2022-2nd to Detroit, do you think Detroit takes the deal?

if Stevie is hoping for Wallsted, no. If he's not, maybe?

 

Not sure its worth it for us tho, Clarke might be gone by then. I guess it could happen right on the virtual draft floor tho if Clarke is still there at 6, and for some reason DET doesn't want him. 

 

My guess is Stevie gets a 2nd and a prospect out of us for this move. 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Sorry buddy, but Hughes defensive game is terrible, which makes him a liability at even strength. a true #1 or #2, can handle even strength play with out costing his team too much.

 

When you  look at his even strength play, and PP play, he still comes out as a minus player, so he needs to be sheltered in someway.............basically what I am saying is if you played Hughes 60 minutes a game, we would loose every game, because he is a negitive player.if it gets better, great, but not if its sheltered minutes to get better.

 

He is young and there is time to improve...time will tell!

Dunno Jan, don't you think this Hughes narrative is getting a bit overblown? no he isn't Tanev, but he did improve a lot after the 1st 14 games: https://canucksarmy.com/2021/03/11/canucks-quinn-hughes-season-tale-two-halves/

 

He's a pup, out of college. Never really had to be a good defenseman there. Its going to take a few seasons for him to learn on the job but he's got the skating skills to become a decent player without the puck. 

  • Thanks 3
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

if Stevie is hoping for Wallsted, no. If he's not, maybe?

 

Not sure its worth it for us tho, Clarke might be gone by then. I guess it could happen right on the virtual draft floor tho if Clarke is still there at 6, and for some reason DET doesn't want him. 

 

My guess is Stevie gets a 2nd and a prospect out of us for this move. 

Yeah, that would be too steep.

 

I do think its on the draft floor, as I am of the belief that if Clarke was gone, then you just draft at 9th

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Dunno Jan, don't you think this Hughes narrative is getting a bit overblown? no he isn't Tanev, but he did improve a lot after the 1st 14 games: https://canucksarmy.com/2021/03/11/canucks-quinn-hughes-season-tale-two-halves/

 

He's a pup, out of college. Never really had to be a good defenseman there. Its going to take a few seasons for him to learn on the job but he's got the skating skills to become a decent player without the puck. 

Well, if he can improve, then that is great Jimmy, but if he needs to be sheltered.....not so much.

 

I would think, the most fair way is to get him that big defensive Dman, who can help him............

 

But as you know, his even strength - his pp was still a negetive last year, so...............................

 

It is why when looking at Rathbone, I see potential to push Quinn.......................

 

I love stars, but it is team that is my focus, and ultimately my true need to be better

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Don't need to become top line players to help the Canucks in their current situation. Drafting either Mac Tavish or Dylan Guenther would be huge for the Canucks because I see  both of them becoming goal scoring wingers on the 2nd line. That's exactly what Canucks need: more goal scoring wingers in the top 6 to finally kick Pearson out of the top 6. He doesn't belong there.

 

My personal opinion is that both will be gone when Canucks pick at 9. Best thing Benning could do is to find either a young top 4 D-Man with term or a young goal scoring winger for the top 6 and try to get such players using the 9oa.

Except Dylan Guenther won't be kicking Tanner Pearson out of the top six. Pearson will be long gone by the time Guenther is ready for a spot in the top six. And obviously they don't need to be top line players to help, but my point was that if they were likely top line players, you obviously take them and run, but if not, you need to consider every option. Also I agree that Guenther and McTavish will most probably not be available at 9; if one of them was, that would make the decision tougher, but still, a guy like Cernak, Kyrou or Thomas could actually fill one of those current needs on the wing or right side defense.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Well, if he can improve, then that is great Jimmy, but if he needs to be sheltered.....not so much.

 

I would think, the most fair way is to get him that big defensive Dman, who can help him............

 

But as you know, his even strength - his pp was still a negetive last year, so...............................

 

It is why when looking at Rathbone, I see potential to push Quinn.......................

 

I love stars, but it is team that is my focus, and ultimately my true need to be better

sure but how much of that is our coaching decisions? we're happy to let a lot of shots through. How much of that was Miller trying to do things himself? there's a lot of unpack in that negative number.

 

All I know is the kid is an elite skater, and he's 'lil. His defensive ceiling is going to centre around him out-skating guys, not being a bull in a China shop. So given the path forward is also his main skill, I think he's got a good chance to at least be average defensively. 

 

But you're correct, we do need some kind of stop-gap partner for him. Even if we get a great, and big, RHD in the 2nd round its going to take at least 2 seasons to get the guy here and he'll be rookie. 

 

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I totally agree with this and would expect that any trade would come with its own set of qualifiers............

 

IMO, in this draft, I am of the opinion that Detroit, who needs practically everything, except RHD, would go after an elite Goalie or as you say Center if they came up. I would assume (Oh, oh) that a LHD would be high on their list as well, but for some reason, with Wallstedt being such a elite goalie, i could see them going for that.  But in saying that, 

they could easily go after Cossa with their 2nd -1st, so yesh, its probably Benier, then one of Hughes, or Edvinsson.

 

And in saying all that, yes, it totally matters who is still on the board, and what the Canucks offer is, and yes, it is totally a game day decision, but honestly, what GM would trade until he knows what is what.

 

I would imagine, Benning, if he wanted Clarke, would offer it, at each draft position until he is gone or we pick.

 

My opinion, is the Canucks need a young RHD Dman, more than anything, by a large margin, so if we were to trade our 9th for a player, it should be for a young RHD that is already playing in the NHL and has upside. Cernak would be awesome, but for a 9th? I doubt it, as Tampa needs the cap space he creates. I am notsre who else is out there that fits the bill.

 

I also thing that the Canucks RHD is somewhat confusing in that the 2 Dman we have there now (Myers and Schmidt) as Benning signed Myers to be a 2/3 RHD, and that is exactly what Schmidt is (IMO), so they are both plugged into the same hole sort of speak. I find our RHD confusing in make up.

 

I would also move Schmidt "IF" the price was right, only because you can not move Myers as easily.

 

Always enjoy our reads....keep them coming!

Yeah unfortunately you're probably right about Cernak. We saw them give up a king's ransom for a solid player with a great contract in Blake Coleman. Cernak's contract right now is worth more than gold to them.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems there's a lot that needs to happen this off season:

 

Petey and Hughes' contracts

Expansion Draft

Buyouts

UFAs

Trades

the Draft

 

Canucks need help in a few areas. I think the Top 6 is adequate with a healthy Pettersson, and maybe Podkolzin impresses and earns a spot. But the Bottom 6 is pretty poor. Eriksson, Roussel, Virtanen, Beagle, Ferland - all need to be gone, somehow.

 

Hawryluk, Vesey, Edler, Sutter, Hamonic, Baertschi, Michaelis, Boyd all have contracts that expired. Which ones does Benning bring back? 

 

The D is pretty bad too. Will Benning re-sign Edler and Hamonic? And if so, does that mean Juolevi and possibly Rathbone don't get a regular spot? Will Schmidt still be in a Canucks uniform on opening night?  I would prefer they re-sign Hamonic and add another (UFA) defensive Dman with size. Canucks need to be tougher to play against.

 

Lots to do, and all is quiet.  

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Yeah unfortunately you're probably right about Cernak. We saw them give up a king's ransom for a solid player with a great contract in Blake Coleman. Cernak's contract right now is worth more than gold to them.

our best bet might be trading for Foote, if he's not moved to Seattle to help Tampa clear cap which he probably will be. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Seems there's a lot that needs to happen this off season:

 

Petey and Hughes' contracts

Expansion Draft

Buyouts

UFAs

Trades

the Draft

 

Canucks need help in a few areas. I think the Top 6 is adequate with a healthy Pettersson, and maybe Podkolzin impresses and earns a spot. But the Bottom 6 is pretty poor. Eriksson, Roussel, Virtanen, Beagle, Ferland - all need to be gone, somehow.

 

Hawryluk, Vesey, Edler, Sutter, Hamonic, Baertschi, Michaelis, Boyd all have contracts that expired. Which ones does Benning bring back? 

 

The D is pretty bad too. Will Benning re-sign Edler and Hamonic? And if so, does that mean Juolevi and possibly Rathbone don't get a regular spot? Will Schmidt still be in a Canucks uniform on opening night?  I would prefer they re-sign Hamonic and add another (UFA) defensive Dman with size. Canucks need to be tougher to play against.

 

Lots to do, and all is quiet.  

Quiet for us as fans, but I bet there's a lot going on behind the scenes. Everyone has to wait for Seattle. That week between the ED and draft should be pretty darn interesting. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Just a qestion, but if we offered our 2021-9th + 2022-2nd to Detroit, do you think Detroit takes the deal?

easily I think, I would move us down a few spots to get another 2nd round pick

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a good Cam robinson interview on YouTube with Canuck Clay 

 

goes into detail on his on his top ten 

 

has Mctavish 2nd

 

high on Eklund 

 

Isnt a fan of Edvinsson 

 

Thinks Johnson could be the most skilled player in the draft 

 

Thinks that if Hughes doesn’t go to New Jersey he could be available at our pick 

 

Would take Johnson if Edvinsson Johnson and Hughes were all left on the board 

 

Thinks that Walstedt should be a top ten pick but has his doubts that he’ll go that high

Edited by Off_The_Schneid!
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

 

We...we can do better right?

 

I mean...right?

 

I hope

To me getting a player we can slot right in that is only 24 is the right thing to do even if it’s expensive like a top 10 pick. Is it better waiting for that player in 3-4 years or one now that can join miller and horvat while both are still in their prime years or ready when both are in their 30s? If cernak is untouchable at least we tried if you ask me but hes worth it imo.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

our best bet might be trading for Foote, if he's not moved to Seattle to help Tampa clear cap which he probably will be. 

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

53 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

sure but how much of that is our coaching decisions? we're happy to let a lot of shots through. How much of that was Miller trying to do things himself? there's a lot of unpack in that negative number.

 

All I know is the kid is an elite skater, and he's 'lil. His defensive ceiling is going to centre around him out-skating guys, not being a bull in a China shop. So given the path forward is also his main skill, I think he's got a good chance to at least be average defensively. 

 

But you're correct, we do need some kind of stop-gap partner for him. Even if we get a great, and big, RHD in the 2nd round its going to take at least 2 seasons to get the guy here and he'll be rookie. 

 

 

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Sorry buddy, but Hughes defensive game is terrible, which makes him a liability at even strength. a true #1 or #2, can handle even strength play with out costing his team too much.

 

When you  look at his even strength play, and PP play, he still comes out as a minus player, so he needs to be sheltered in someway.............basically what I am saying is if you played Hughes 60 minutes a game, we would loose every game, because he is a negitive player.if it gets better, great, but not if its sheltered minutes to get better.

 

He is young and there is time to improve...time will tell!

This post pretty much could have described almost every player on our back end last year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HighOnHockey said:

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

sorry didn't mean to suggest the 9th oa for Foote, that would be bad. Maybe a player who doesn't need protection, Lockwood maybe? 

 

1 minute ago, HighOnHockey said:

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.

that makes sense. So one of the bigger, but slow footed guys some people have been suggesting maybe isn't the best idea. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.


I think this is where the addition of Shaw has potential to make a huge difference. As he says it’s not just the d’men, it’s also on the forwards to be responsible and be in position to support and receive passes from the d. I think with better systems in place for leaving the zone Quinn is going to change the perceptions about his defensive game. He’s got great skills with his stick and defends pretty well when he’s in position and the team is not constantly losing the puck on zone exits. I see Hughes and others making big strides next year.

  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Assets aren’t worth very much to our GM. We gave up a second round pick and a prospect for Toffoli and then he didn’t sign him.
So we can do that again this year, trade our 9 OA pick and then don’t sign the player. LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Don't need to become top line players to help the Canucks in their current situation. Drafting either Mac Tavish or Dylan Guenther would be huge for the Canucks because I see  both of them becoming goal scoring wingers on the 2nd line. That's exactly what Canucks need: more goal scoring wingers in the top 6 to finally kick Pearson out of the top 6. He doesn't belong there.

 

My personal opinion is that both will be gone when Canucks pick at 9. Best thing Benning could do is to find either a young top 4 D-Man with term or a young goal scoring winger for the top 6 and try to get such players using the 9oa.

I like both Guenther and McTavish so either guy would be a good pick but I don’t see them pushing Pearson down because they’ll be a year or two away. However we already have that guy coming in next year in Podkolzin. I think the Pearson contract we’ll all think looks bad while in the first year of it both Hoglander and Podkolzin look better pushing Pearson down to an overplayed 3rd liner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wildwood12 said:

Assets aren’t worth very much to our GM. We gave up a second round pick and a prospect for Toffoli and then he didn’t sign him.
So we can do that again this year, trade our 9 OA pick and then don’t sign the player. LOL

Yeah that was bad asset management. Should have signed Toffoli and tried to trade Pearson for futures to make room. Management has done a great job drafting lately but that doesn’t mean you should be giving away good prospects and picks for 17 games of a guy. Cycle in our top prospects while trading out the vets for more picks and prospects. Or couple these guys together for somebody with term or a sign and trade guy. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...