[Official] 2021 Training Camp Thread

[canuktravella]

4 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

You realize there is more to hockey than points right? Also amount of games played and powerplay time are also a thing. 

  hes not talented enough for pp time   he played same  amount  of games as most of our forwards cant use that as an excuse.

Edited January 6, 2021 by canuktravella

[ForzaTikare]

5 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

  hes not talented enough for pp time   he played same  anount of games as most of our forwards cant use that as an excuse

O zone vs D zone starts, how does that look?

 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

That's exactly what some people want. In this thread and many others it's been suggested that guys like Sutter, Beagle, Rousell, Pearson should be moved because our 18-19-year-old prospects are ready and already better, even tho they have never played in the league. And there have been debates on here, HF etc crapping on Benning for year's for holding onto vets with expiring contracts instead of moving them. I won't single anyone out but 5 pages back 2 people think Sutter and Pearson should be moved for no other reason then to pave the way for Podz and Hogs.

 

 

 

We'll what can I say... Perils of assumptions and painting with wide brushes.

[Alienhuggyflow]

2 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

  hes not talented enough for pp time   he played same  amount  of games as most of our forwards cant use that as an excuse.

Well he has been used on the pp but ya there are better options. My point is with Sutter you get a 15-17 goal 30 point 3c who is good in a defensive role kills penalties etc. AG gets most of his points on the PP while getting caved in 5\5 unless heavily sheltered.  I'm old school, I prefer my 3c to be able to play a defensive role.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

10 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

3rd best lol

2017/2018 he was our 3rd best forward, which would probably explain why our record was so low, he played amazing though. 3rd on toi and had an amazing +8 on a terrible team, 4 short handed points and 6th in even strength points. shutdown centre and our top pk'er

2016/2017 he was our 4th best forward for sure 5th in points, 2nd in toi. played 3 minutes a game short handed and was our shutdown line centre

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

So Benning should oblige and weaken his own team's depth for what would be helpful maybe in the future, if at all?

Unless we are out of it Sutter especially isn't getting moved unless AG takes a massive step this year. Our record with Sutter in the lineup speaks for itself and he was excellent in the bubble you don't trade that in a season as unique as this unless someone offers something stupid (they won't) If he can stay healthy and AG doesn't improve defensively, I hope Benning brings him back if he's willing to play on a team-friendly deal. 

I know you said previously that multiple moves can be made one to bring in an upgrade and one to clear cap and I can see that on the wing in the top six but not for 3c. I doubt Jim feels the need to trade valuable pieces when 3c is fine if Sutter is healthy and hopefully an improving AG. 

 

 

Well yes, this is assuming 'things' happen lol. Maybe Gaudette takes a step and perhaps we can better use expiring Sutter's cap space and roster spot to fill/improve a spot elsewhere.

 

Or yes, perhaps Gaudette doesn't and Benning has a replacement/improvement at 3C lined up. Would you be so opposed to moving Sutter for futures and then trading a not-taking-a-step Gaudette, plus said futures (likely plus), for say a Tierney or similar?

 

Like I said. Lack of imagination, myopic, reductive and not remotely binary as some suggest. One can still 'sell' vets even while 'buying', or if not rebuilding.

Edited January 6, 2021 by aGENT

[Kootenay Gold]

43 minutes ago, the grinder said:

that would be a chequing account , not checking  , get it right lol

Lol... It can be either. Depends on if you are American or Canadian.

[theo5789]

31 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Didn't green dress Sutter over AG in the bubble?  No disrespect to AG but Sutter is far better at what a 3c should be. AG was horrible in the bubble and was sheltered all season. Hopefully, he improves but I recall most of his offence coming from the PP and him being a trainwreck defensively.

I know we love AG he seems like a great kid and has a cool story but he's a bit of a tweener, better suited in an offensive role but being used in a role that isn't ideal. Kind of reminds me of Kerfoot or Jost.

 

Gaudette is a work in progress for sure, but coaching seems to be grooming him for the role. That is the current line in camp as noted from the tweets. There is talk that Gaudette could play a wing role, but we are deep there, so it'd be much more favourable if Gaudette can play center well. At the end of the day, he provides secondary scoring and that is also something we need. He's been tasked to work on his PK which would be another added asset, and something that would be absurd to ask of something who was a "trainwreck defensively". He's recently revealed that he's had an issue with his digestion, so perhaps if he can manage that, he can add to his strength and weight which could help him overall in this role.

[Bure_Pavel]

31 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

 

 6th best lol thats hilarious 

miller 72 points 

petey 66 

horvat 53

boeser 45 

pearson 45

virtanen 36 

gaudette 33 

leivo 19

toffoli 10points in 10 games 

beagle pk and leads nhl in faceoffs 

sutter 17 points  

 

id say hes 11th best forward last yr especially if u look at   cap hit per point hes right at the bottom  other than beagle but beagle is best faceoff guy soo ya not sure where u think hes 6th best player you sound like a homer 

Sutter was the 6th highest scoring forward in the playoffs last year. He is right handed center who is good defensively and at draws. Until Gaudette can fill that role he is still valuable and should be our 3rd line center. Is he over paid? Yeah, but in my opinion worth 2.5 mil still in a normal season.   

 

Bonus: Good leadership qualities and well liked in the room. 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Bure_Pavel

[Junkyard Dog]

56 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Well if you have line designed for more offensive time, then you're "sheltering" them into that role and negating the idea of "rolling 4 lines". If the concern is a 24 year old and a 23 year old on one line, you top line consists of 3 players that age or younger (a recently turned 20 year old in Hoglander). I think Hoglander will be a decent player, but I think we need to dial back the expectation for him. He may provide speed and fiestiness, but so does Miller with Miller adding even more to the line like being defensively responsible, having veteran experience and he can win faceoffs for possession for the offensive line to get going.

 

Miller could play well with anyone likely, but he's shown a strong connection with Petey so why break it up now?

 

This talk of offensive lines and shutdown lines seems contradictory to me if we are truly rolling 4 lines (which to me means any line can be on the ice at any time against any competition). Once you have lines that have roles, then it's really no different than what we have been doing. It would seem your only gripe is the "3rd line" and like I said, we could always slot Sutter in with say Roussel and Gaudette if that eases the idea of having Gaudette and MacEwen/Virtanen together.

 

Schmidt is actually very strong defensively as he is a puck mover. There's a reason why he was on the ice most last season against the top opposition. Hamonic covers the PK loss of Tanev while adding more physicality. I was a big Tanev supporter, but we have clearly upgraded here because I never thought we could get someone like Schmidt. I think many don't realize the impact of having someone like Schmidt added to this group.

 

Our biggest weakness last year wasn't really the forwards. It was the defense and we have revamped and upgraded here.

Not necessarily since Petey's line is gonna face top level competition. Primarily in match up  defensive lines. Not to mention the fact that they are our best offensive line that hasn't had struggles defensively like line 3. 

 

If Hogger plays well than why not play him with Petey? Wouldn't he fare better on an offensive line than a two-way line like Horvat's? Why break up Miller-Petey? Because you create Miller/Horvat which is gonna score more than Pearson/Horvat and play stronger defensively. Miller is a good two-way player.

 

There's a lot of context that goes into lines and rolling 4 lines. ideally you want lines to play a certain roles and be utilized to the best of their capabilities at the same time. If one line can't do what the team would like than it is up to other lines to make up for it.

 

For example Horvat having to be used more defensively 5v5 when his line is our 2nd best one offensively and consistently while facing strong competition. If Gaud's line was good enough where he could take up some of that responsibility, instead of having to be compensated for, than it frees Horvat's line up to be used differently, giving us more flexibility with how we use our 4 lines. Ideally I'd like to see a Gaud line that can free up a bit responsibility from the 2nd and 4th lines while providing some good secondary scoring.

 

Overall to work as a line(Even as a player) in the NHL you got to be really good at one thing or bring a few desirable things to the table. Motte/Beagle brought a good amount of consistent physical play and good consistent D, Petey's line brought elite offense and Horvat's line did everything and then some defensively. Gaud's line brought some good secondary scoring but the weakest D play of all 4 lines and the worst consistency which is expected out of 2 youngsters still rounding out their game when paired together like that.

 

Our biggest weakness was team D. We gave up some of the most shots in the league last year. I feel as if it goes bigger than making one or two changes and I really like bringing in Schmidt/Hamonic. There was a reason why Marky was MVP. Goaltending made up for our lack of team D and we don't have Marky anymore so we'll see how it goes.

 

Wait and see approach for almost everything.

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Junkyard Dog

[Dixon Ward]

2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I agree Rob

But I think it goes a little further

Not only do top teams have a solid top 6

but they have 1 or 2 guys waiting that "could" be top 6

This is where the Canucks show they are a team in transition

with a could/or could not be there

There certainly is a good chance we have taken then step

but we still need 1 or 2 of the following to take that next step

Virtanen, Gaudette, or Hoglander (with Podkolzin and Lind "potentially" pushing in the year ahead)

each has a chance to take that next step

and training camp or the first few games will show whether they have or not

As you know.......every tier of team, has more and more top level players

Benning by way of either design, luck or both, has strengthened the defense

and it is my belief that he will now wait to see who wants to take that next step on the forwards

This is why Hoglander is getting such a long look on the top 6,

if he catches on and is ligit, we take a step further along the road......

If not, it will take a little longer

Pretty bloody interesting...pretty bloody exciting!

 

I generally agree, but it should be noted that Virtanen was 33rd in scoring for RW last season.  With 31 teams that would make him the second best 2nd line RW.  That was while coming 70th in minutes among RW (13:05).  Boeser is clearly a top-12 RW in the league.  JT Miller and Pearson were be 5th and 25th among LW.  Petersson and Horvat were 12th and 28th among centres.  So only Virtanen is outside the top 30 and he had very few minutes.  I think that is a pretty solid top 6.  Add Hoglander and Gaudette I think you have 1 or 2 guys that "could" be top 6.  

[Junkyard Dog]

9 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Gaudette is a work in progress for sure, but coaching seems to be grooming him for the role. That is the current line in camp as noted from the tweets. There is talk that Gaudette could play a wing role, but we are deep there, so it'd be much more favourable if Gaudette can play center well. At the end of the day, he provides secondary scoring and that is also something we need. He's been tasked to work on his PK which would be another added asset, and something that would be absurd to ask of something who was a "trainwreck defensively". He's recently revealed that he's had an issue with his digestion, so perhaps if he can manage that, he can add to his strength and weight which could help him overall in this role.

Green played him at PK during Training Camp last year so I wonder what prevented him from trying out Gaud at the PK last season? Maybe he was comfortable with the personnel we already had? I would have liked to see Virtanen/Gaud get some opportunities to grow defensively(PK/etc) early on last year.

[Junkyard Dog]

18 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Well yes, this is assuming things happen lol. Maybe Gaudette takes a step and perhaps we can better use expiring Sutter's cap space and roster spot to fill/improve a spot elsewhere.

 

Or yes, perhaps Gaudette doesn't and Benning has a replacement/improvement at 3C lined up. Would you be so opposed to moving Sutter for futures and then trading a not-taking-a-step Gaudette, plus said futures (likely plus), for say a Tierney or similar?

 

Like I said. Lack of imagination, myopic, reductive and not remotely binary as some suggest. One can still 'sell' vets even while 'buying', or if not rebuilding.

I see value in Gaudette as a winger still if he doesn't work out at C. 

[Oregon.Duck]

8 hours ago, Pure961089 said:

Caption This ....

 

 

Ha, nice. 

[the grinder]

44 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Lol... It can be either. Depends on if you are American or Canadian.

well we are Canadian team after all 

[theo5789]

30 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Not necessarily since Petey's line is gonna face top level competition. Primarily in match up  defensive lines. Not to mention the fact that they are our best offensive line that hasn't had struggles defensively like line 3. 

 

If Hogger plays well than why not play him with Petey? Wouldn't he fare better on an offensive line than a two-way line like Horvat's? Why break up Miller-Petey? Because you create Miller/Horvat which is gonna score more than Pearson/Horvat and play stronger defensively. Miller is a good two-way player.

 

There's a lot of context that goes into lines and rolling 4 lines. ideally you want lines to play a certain roles and be utilized to the best of their capabilities at the same time. If one line can't do what the team would like than it is up to other lines to make up for it.

 

For example Horvat having to be used more defensively 5v5 when his line is our 2nd best one offensively and consistently while facing strong competition. If Gaud's line was good enough where he could take up some of that responsibility, instead of having to be compensated for, than it frees Horvat's line up to be used differently, giving us more flexibility with how we use our 4 lines. Ideally I'd like to see a Gaud line that can free up a bit responsibility from the 2nd and 4th lines while providing some good secondary scoring.

 

Overall to work as a line(Even as a player) in the NHL you got to be really good at one thing or bring a few desirable things to the table. Motte/Beagle brought a good amount of consistent physical play and good consistent D, Petey's line brought elite offense and Horvat's line did everything and then some defensively. Gaud's line brought some good secondary scoring but the weakest D play of all 4 lines and the worst consistency which is expected out of 2 youngsters still rounding out their game when paired together like that.

 

Our biggest weakness was team D. We gave up some of the most shots in the league last year. I feel as if it goes bigger than making one or two changes and I really like bringing in Schmidt/Hamonic. There was a reason why Marky was MVP. Goaltending made up for our lack of team D and we don't have Marky anymore so we'll see how it goes.

 

Wait and see approach for almost everything.

 

Would they face the top opposition often intentionally? We don't know if Hoglander is strong enough two way. Boeser is definitely not considered a two way player. That pushes Petey into the main defensive role which would dial him back offensively. Can't have the expectation that they would just be dominant and play in the offensive zone every shift especially against the top opposition. The reason why Petey's line can play against the big boys is because of Miller. What happens if we ice the puck? Would you rather have Miller on the draw or Petey right now? Miller can play with Horvat, but Miller was unlocked with Petey. Miller and Horvat together is almost redundant unless you're trying to form an ultimate shutdown line. In which case, we'd be playing matchup even more so rather than rolling 4 lines. I'm not against the idea of playing matchup, I just don't think having them together is the best scenario for rolling 4 lines.

 

I agree the main sticking point is can the 3rd line be trusted. But that would mean plugging Roussel and Sutter with one of the younger players if that's the concern.

 

Being hemmed in our zone is mainly attributed to us not being able to connect from the defense to the forwards. Schmidt adds to that element. Juolevi's passing would add that as well. Being able to transition out is what's important in possession and breaking out. There's a reason why Benning specifically targetted this area to improve.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

17 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Well yes, this is assuming things happen lol. Maybe Gaudette takes a step and perhaps we can better use expiring Sutter's cap space and roster spot to fill/improve a spot elsewhere.

 

Or yes, perhaps Gaudette doesn't and Benning has a replacement/improvement at 3C lined up. Would you be so opposed to moving Sutter for futures and then trading a not-taking-a-step Gaudette, plus said futures (likely plus), for say a Tierney or similar?

 

Like I said. Lack of imagination, myopic, reductive and not remotely binary as some suggest. One can still 'sell' vets even while 'buying', or if not rebuilding.

lol, you're funny thinking ottawa is going to trade with us, it's highly unlikely. it's going to be a tight race in the northern division. and besides that i think that's a terrible trade in this compressed covid season. if these teams are fighting for a playoff spot, neither of them make these trades. depth is more important than having a slightly better centre.  so unless hawryluk or  graovac somehow make a huge jump in devolpment  we don't make this trade. ottawa doesn't make this trade because they replace thier 2nd line centre for a 3rd  line centre. having AG and brandon sutter in our depth charts>>having tierney in your lineup,  one injury and we would have to break up the top line and move miller to a pivot. it would also have a trickle down effect of watering down our left wing too.

 

maybe consider making a trade proposal that wouldn't obliterate our depth? 

[Kootenay Gold]

14 minutes ago, the grinder said:

well we are Canadian team after all 

We are but not all CDC'ers on this board are.

'

[aGENT]

39 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I see value in Gaudette as a winger still if he doesn't work out at C. 

Absolutely possible! Though we do have a lot of winger depth and it's arguably the easiest position to fill.

 

Personally I'd see more value in a Tierney or similar player.

 

Speaking to the conversation you and Theo were having. He'd sure free Horvat and his line up for additional offensive usage. Not only that, he'd be a hell of an injury fill in should Horvat get hurt.

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 hour ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Lol... It can be either. Depends on if you are American or Canadian.

Long as we all agree LouiE's stuck in a chequing-role!