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

[Speculation] Canucks clearing Cap for Hamonic


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Stelar said:

Lol. If he tries?

I think he has a lack of motivation to be consistent. If he tries a little harder at being consistent, maybe showing up to camp in great shape for instance, I think he can be great. 
 

Maturity, that’s what he needs. Priorities of being the best player he can. If he “tries” and matures, Virtanen is our dark horse this year. I believe he has that in him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Filthy McNasty said:

Virtanen is not and will not be a top six forward, he has had his chance and could not put it together he will be a decent top 9 if he can be consistent with using his size which seems to be a problem. I don’t see guadette as being able to fill tofolli shoes  he had plenty of Time in the top six as well , so unless hogs comes in and wows us to fill that top six then we have massive hole, and we have had holes  for years chucking who ever we could with BO and not finding the solution when we got tofolli we finally, finally had a full top 6

 

if we can’t fill it then once again we will put the blender on max speed for Bo  which is not fair to our captain 

He has been getting better each years. Was on pace for over 20 goals last year. I think if there were no playoffs last year people would be saying a different thing. He was very inconsistent in the playoffs and I know that's a big issue, I just still not ready to give up on the kid. He just shows so much potential. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris12345 said:

Huge upgrade over Stetcher or Benn but I fear he is exactly what we don't need.

 

Another dman who can't shoot that is injury prone and punches out of his weight class.

He's a solid defensive guy who hits a ton and at least isn't afraid.  We do need defensemen who actually play defense; you realize this, right?

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Justdean10 said:

He has been getting better each years. Was on pace for over 20 goals last year. I think if there were no playoffs last year people would be saying a different thing. He was very inconsistent in the playoffs and I know that's a big issue, I just still not ready to give up on the kid. He just shows so much potential. 

true, also with bennings interveiw saying he needed to do more in the playoffs, also his earlier interview saying its time to show what you got or get traded/demoted in the line, for this up coming season.

Edited by TNucks1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as we aren't trading any 1sts or top prospects to lose a Beagle/ Sutter/ Loui/ Baertschi and open cap space then that would be fine by me.
Hamonic at a minimum would at least be a reclamation project, at most could provide needed defensive support to someone like Juolevi/ Rathbone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO it's time to let the young d prospects fill out the bottom 6 and play (Chatfield, Rafferty, *Juolevi, Rathbone or....pie in the sky Treeamkin!!).

 

*Penciled in bottom 6 already by all accounts.

 

However, it's going to be a shortened season so depth at D would be nice. We have some older bodies in Edler and Myers on D looking at playing a lot of back to back nights probably. So If the price is right and say Ferland ends up on LTIR, which could allot us some more $ to spend, Hamonic might fit the bill on a 1 year deal. More term than that, I say pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Filthy McNasty said:

Virtanen is not and will not be a top six forward, he has had his chance and could not put it together he will be a decent top 9 if he can be consistent with using his size which seems to be a problem. I don’t see guadette as being able to fill tofolli shoes  he had plenty of Time in the top six as well , so unless hogs comes in and wows us to fill that top six then we have massive hole, and we have had holes  for years chucking who ever we could with BO and not finding the solution when we got tofolli we finally, finally had a full top 6

 

if we can’t fill it then once again we will put the blender on max speed for Bo  which is not fair to our captain 

I disagree.  
Jakes numbers were a lot better than you’d think, and put up good points despite playing a lot  of time with 3rd 4th liners.  
It sounds like this off-season he has been taking training seriously.   
Sometimes a kid needs time to figure it out.  
Jake is a potato head.  It’s taking a bit longer.   

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I want the Canucks to have more depth, they really need to start finding out which prospect will swim and which will sink.  

Prospect needs to have NHL experience to find out whether they can make it in the league or not.  

"Marinating" a prospect only makes sense if there is actually room and a clear path going forward.  

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, King Heffy said:

He's a solid defensive guy who hits a ton and at least isn't afraid.  We do need defensemen who actually play defense; you realize this, right?

No I didn't. I thought we'd try Demko on d....although Kirk McLean could stick handle better than all of them but 43.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we looking for a good PK D that can eat minutes on a cheap 1 year deal Hainesy is available.

 

He's old but he was playing 20:41 in 64 games last season. Was a good mentor for Chabot and could do good with OJ. LHD that can play the right side.

 

That's if he doesn't hang them up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

If we looking for a good PK D that can eat minutes on a cheap 1 year deal Hainesy is available.

 

He's old but he was playing 20:41 in 64 games last season. Was a good mentor for Chabot and could do good with OJ. LHD that can play the right side.

 

That's if he doesn't hang them up.

While I agree, I think the idea is to try to add an actual RHD to balance out the pairings more. But Hainsey would be a respectable backup plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Of all the players we lost, I was most disappointed about Toffoli.

Anyone wondering if Benning thought one of two things?

- Ferland would retire.

- Eriksson would be willing to be moved, or retire.

 

That's the only way I see why he brought Toffoli. Benning doesn't seem to be a straight up rental guy. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lancaster said:

As much as I want the Canucks to have more depth, they really need to start finding out which prospect will swim and which will sink.  

Prospect needs to have NHL experience to find out whether they can make it in the league or not.  

"Marinating" a prospect only makes sense if there is actually room and a clear path going forward.  

It's going to be a shortened season, injuries are going to happen and time management will likely be a thing for most teams. I think we could add depth and we could still see plenty of the young D get some game time, especially if we do indeed have a taxi squad. If we add Hamonic, I could see us having OJ/Rarhbone-Hamonic as a set pairing and could flip in Benn-Rafferty/Chatfield when needed.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Anyone wondering if Benning thought one of two things?

- Ferland would retire.

- Eriksson would be willing to be moved, or retire.

 

That's the only way I see why he brought Toffoli. Benning doesn't seem to be a straight up rental guy. 

I think Benning expected the cap to go up as had been planned. The trade was made well before the world shut down. We had a conditional pick set into the trade that likely had us thinking about re-signing him for sure.

 

We had tried to move LE, Benning had said so, but we couldn't make a deal that made sense happen. It's just the way it goes. We have a lot of promising talent coming up on wing that I'm glad we didn't tie up more cap there and decided to keep it on defense with acquisition of Schmidt instead.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KirkSave said:

IMO it's time to let the young d prospects fill out the bottom 6 and play (Chatfield, Rafferty, *Juolevi, Rathbone or....pie in the sky Treeamkin!!).

 

*Penciled in bottom 6 already by all accounts.

 

However, it's going to be a shortened season so depth at D would be nice. We have some older bodies in Edler and Myers on D looking at playing a lot of back to back nights probably. So If the price is right and say Ferland ends up on LTIR, which could allot us some more $ to spend, Hamonic might fit the bill on a 1 year deal. More term than that, I say pass.

Id like to see this as well.  It's a shortened/oddball season anyhow.  

 

I also think you'd get the wolf pack mentality going as well with these young kids playing for one another/fighting for jobs.

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

Id like to see this as well.  It's a shortened/oddball season anyhow.  

 

I also think you'd get the wolf pack mentality going as well with these young kids playing for one another/fighting for jobs.

Or you could try and put together the best team you can and let the kids fight for fewer spots.

Guys will still get injuries and sick, kids will get a shot, but Hamonic does upgrade our D. And we really need an upgraded D.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...