Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 On 1/30/2021 at 7:21 PM, Petey_BOI said: JV and AG for Bennett and leivo Swear I was thinking the same thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggynucks Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said: Swear I was thinking the same thing. I don’t know why everyone is so eager to offer up Gaudette. I really think he has a solid future. Solid numbers with limited experience and love his attitude and enthusiasm. Sutter is gone after this year and he slots right in to the third line centre role. Before the season started I wanted Green to try him on the ride side with Horvat and Pearson. With the emergence of Hoglander though, probably best to keep grooming him for that third line centre role. To be honest, I would rather Gaudette than either JV or SB. I would be fine with Virtanen for Bennett though. Would probably have to include a small sweetener (maybe a 3rd round pick?) Maybe not. Edit: I take it back. Thought Bennett had better offensive numbers than he has put up. I know points aren’t everything but instead of a lateral move, you could probably include JV in a trade to acquire a bigger piece than Bennett. Edited February 1, 2021 by Iggynucks 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Canuck #12 Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Iggynucks said: I don’t know why everyone is so eager to offer up Gaudette. I really think he has a solid future. Solid numbers with limited experience and love his attitude and enthusiasm. Sutter is gone after this year and he slots right in to the third line centre role. Before the season started I wanted Green to try him on the ride side with Horvat and Pearson. With the emergence of Hoglander though, probably best to keep grooming him for that third line centre role. To be honest, I would rather Gaudette than either JV or SB. I would be fine with Virtanen for Bennett though. Would probably have to include a small sweetener (maybe a 3rd round pick?) Maybe not. Edit: I take it back. Thought Bennett had better offensive numbers than he has put up. I know points aren’t everything but instead of a lateral move, you could probably include JV in a trade to acquire a bigger piece than Bennett. That's what you and many other CDC'ers seem to think, as I grudgingly admit to once doing as well. But according to Patrick Johnston in today's Province, the rest of the league may not value Jake quite as highly: "But are teams interested in Virtanen anymore? One source doesn’t think so: “30 teams would have passed on qualifying him.” https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/the-skate-not-at-all-like-a-hog-on-ice Edited February 1, 2021 by Captain Canuck #12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Sam Bennett isn’t coming to Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alucard Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 If they hold a same trade value, I would make the trade, Jake to flames for Bennet and late pick. If Benning does not think bennett is worth it then I trust JB in these regards so if he does not trade Jake for him i am okay with that also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 I would trade Pearson for him to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Junkyard Dog Posted February 1, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted February 1, 2021 Just now, Nicklas Bo Hunter said: I would trade Pearson for him to be honest. I wouldn’t. He’s a downgrade. Pearson has chemistry with Bo and can give you 40-50 points in an 82 game schedule playing against teams top players. In the playoffs he pitched in offensively as well and upped his physical play from the regular season. He isn’t super talented offensively but he’s consistent and is willing to go to those harder areas. Even if we crap the bed and fall from the standings we could probably net a better return. Dude has 63 points in 99 games as a Canuck. 1 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 1 minute ago, Junkyard Dog said: I wouldn’t. He’s a downgrade. Pearson has chemistry with Bo and can give you 40-50 points in an 82 game schedule playing against teams top players. In the playoffs he pitched in offensively as well and upped his physical play from the regular season. He isn’t super talented offensively but he’s consistent and is willing to go to those harder areas. Even if we crap the bed and fall from the standings we could probably net a better return. Dude has 63 points in 99 games as a Canuck. Pearson is a UFA who we will not even sign at the end of the year. I think he is being over inflated by playing with Bo and Hoglander..... if you watch his goals its mostly a great pass from one of those two. He is very annoying to watch play. WHen he has the puck he just shoots even if there is like 0 chance of a goal. Hoglander has been open so much but he just shoots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Nicklas Bo Hunter said: Pearson is a UFA who we will not even sign at the end of the year. I think he is being over inflated by playing with Bo and Hoglander..... if you watch his goals its mostly a great pass from one of those two. He is very annoying to watch play. WHen he has the puck he just shoots even if there is like 0 chance of a goal. Hoglander has been open so much but he just shoots. Like I said he isn’t super talented offensively. Has a decent shot. His game isn’t pretty but it’s effective. He’s just consistent with going to the hard areas offensively. That’s why he produces points. It works with Bo and you’re seeing it work with Hogger too. He’s a great complementary piece offensively that can play vs other team’s offensive lines too. I don’t see a reason why we should downgrade. Pearson is better than Bennett. Chemistry is already there. Should looking to trade a guy like Virtanen who probably needs a change in scenery like Bennett. Edited February 1, 2021 by Junkyard Dog 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 8 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said: Like I said he isn’t super talented offensively. Has a decent shot. His game isn’t pretty but it’s effective. He’s just consistent with going to the hard areas offensively. That’s why he produces points. It works with Bo and you’re seeing it work with Hogger too. He’s a great complementary piece offensively that can play vs other team’s offensive lines too. I don’t see a reason why we should downgrade. Pearson is better than Bennett. Chemistry is already there. Should looking to trade a guy like Virtanen who probably needs a change in scenery like Bennett. I appreciate this its a good outlook. I just think Vancouver is not going to sign Pearson anyways while Calgary might and Vancouver also has a need for a top 3 C which Bennet can play C or W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Just now, Nicklas Bo Hunter said: I appreciate this its a good outlook. I just think Vancouver is not going to sign Pearson anyways while Calgary might and Vancouver also has a need for a top 3 C which Bennet can play C or W. Understandable. If we’re competing for a spot I don’t see us moving him though nevertheless and I personally feel like we can do better than Bennett if we do end up faltering. Pearson is an effective player who can be used in different situations while producing good(not great) results. Teams will value what he can bring and how versatile he is. We also are already in a sort of similar situation with Virtanen already. Swapping players who may need a change in scenery seems like a better move if we want Bennett. They even have the same cap hit at 2.55M just Bennett is an RFA this offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 Virtanen for Bennett makes too much sense considering the ages, draft positions, cap hits, qualifying offers, etc as well as the fact they’re both in Canada and wouldn’t have to quarantine. I see Flames fans on CP talking about guys like Mete or Dunn but I think the cap hit/QO makes those trades unpalatable for the other teams. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 9 hours ago, Captain Canuck #12 said: That's what you and many other CDC'ers seem to think, as I grudgingly admit to once doing as well. But according to Patrick Johnston in today's Province, the rest of the league may not value Jake quite as highly: "But are teams interested in Virtanen anymore? One source doesn’t think so: “30 teams would have passed on qualifying him.” https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/the-skate-not-at-all-like-a-hog-on-ice 30 teams would not qualify a 20 goal a season pace player? Who ever Johnston's source is, the guy must be a chronic weed smoker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said: Like I said he isn’t super talented offensively. Has a decent shot. His game isn’t pretty but it’s effective. He’s just consistent with going to the hard areas offensively. That’s why he produces points. It works with Bo and you’re seeing it work with Hogger too. He’s a great complementary piece offensively that can play vs other team’s offensive lines too. I don’t see a reason why we should downgrade. Pearson is better than Bennett. Chemistry is already there. Should looking to trade a guy like Virtanen who probably needs a change in scenery like Bennett. Trading Jake to Cal has some dangerous possibilities for JB. With Bennett; what you see is what you get. Jake is a bit of an enigma; there is a possibility that leaving Vancouver (and all the distractions it offers), could end up being just what he needs. I don't think Bennett plays C much; he usually plays W on the bottom 6. I agree that Pearson is a better player. The Canucks definitely have a need for a 3C. The Flyers are incredibly strong at C. Hayes, Giroux, Nolan, Couturier, Laughton and Bunnaman (rookie). They also have a couple of young C's on ELCs (non roster). Currently Scott Laughton is playing on the 4th line, but when Couturier returns from injury, he will lose his spot. He appears to be a JB type player and looks to have a lot of potential. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/76690/scott-laughton A pretty all-round player with good leadership abilities. Plays a strong two-way game and reads the game exceptionally well. Not overly flashy, but can put up some points on the board. Good penalty killer and skater. Likes to play the body. http://sportsforecaster.com/nhl/player/9415t Usually gives maximum effort when on the ice. Is plenty feisty, but also displays very good two-way ability. Is also a pretty good leader. Can play both centre and wing at the highest level. Needs to continue to add more bulk to his 6-1 frame so that he may thrive in the long run playing his aggressive style at the National Hockey League level. Must also be more consistent. Long Range Potential:Quality, versatile and feisty two-way forward with a little upside. I don't know if Philly has a need for a W. I think there would have to be a sweetener along with Jake. Laughton would be a huge addition to the team if JB could get him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 9 minutes ago, gurn said: 30 teams would not qualify a 20 goal a season pace player? Who ever Johnston's source is, the guy must be a chronic weed smoker. Whenever someone uses "pace" to describe production it is just trying to obscure reality. In any given period a player can be "on pace" for any number of things. In reality Virtanen was on pace for a terrible year last year for the first part of the season, was on a PPG pace for a few weeks in the middle of the season, and on pace for one of his worst career years ever in the last part of the season. Most GMs can figure out that the player is more likely the guy who has 6 years of history being what he is compared with the guy who spent a few weeks on a hot streak. Not sure if 30 teams would have passed on qualifying him, but certainly most likely would have. Beyond his questionable performance on the ice, they have to layer in the opportunity cost for those cap dollars and the unique offseason that just happened. By the time the qualifying offer had to happen, the league knew there was no money and would be amazing deals to be had. Really, would we have been better off letting Jake walk and using those dollars towards a huge chunk of Toffoli's contract? How about a defensively solid veteran like Koivu, Granlund, or Haula? I am pretty sure none of them would be pasted to the bench right now and seeing their asset value drop like a stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 10 hours ago, Iggynucks said: I don’t know why everyone is so eager to offer up Gaudette. I really think he has a solid future. Solid numbers with limited experience and love his attitude and enthusiasm. Sutter is gone after this year and he slots right in to the third line centre role. Before the season started I wanted Green to try him on the ride side with Horvat and Pearson. With the emergence of Hoglander though, probably best to keep grooming him for that third line centre role. To be honest, I would rather Gaudette than either JV or SB. I would be fine with Virtanen for Bennett though. Would probably have to include a small sweetener (maybe a 3rd round pick?) Maybe not. Edit: I take it back. Thought Bennett had better offensive numbers than he has put up. I know points aren’t everything but instead of a lateral move, you could probably include JV in a trade to acquire a bigger piece than Bennett. While I appreciate the step that Gaudette has taken in his game this year, I'm just not sure if he's the type of guy that you want as a 3rd line center. Given his skillset, he's not the type of guy that is going to take on tougher defensive match-ups in order to alleviate pressure off of the top two lines (so that they can focus more on offence). While the Canucks were able to get away with that last season since they were using Pearson-Horvat-Eriksson as their shut down line, the Canucks are trying to make their 2nd line into a more offensively defined line with Hoglander's presence there. In other words, it's they need that 3rd line to be the one taking on at least some tough match ups but Gaudette just really isn't that guy. To me - Gaudette would be ideally suited to playing on a rebuilding team where he'd be given ample opportunity to develop into a 2nd line center. On a good team, you could put Gaudette on the 4th line. The Canucks clearly play better when Sutter is healthy and is being used in that 3rd line C spot. I think Sam Bennett would have a similar effect. Again, I like Gaudette and hope he can prove me wrong, but I don't see him being a 3rd line center. He will either have to become good enough to be a 2nd line or "2A" center, or he'll have to be used as a 4th line center as part of an energy line one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said: Like I said he isn’t super talented offensively. Has a decent shot. His game isn’t pretty but it’s effective. He’s just consistent with going to the hard areas offensively. That’s why he produces points. It works with Bo and you’re seeing it work with Hogger too. He’s a great complementary piece offensively that can play vs other team’s offensive lines too. I don’t see a reason why we should downgrade. Pearson is better than Bennett. Chemistry is already there. Should looking to trade a guy like Virtanen who probably needs a change in scenery like Bennett. I don't understand why Bennett is being compared to Pearson seeing as how Bennett is a natural center. If I understand correctly, this is also one of the problems that Bennett has with Flames (i.e. he's being deployed as a winger instead of his natural C spot). Will Sam Bennett be the next Joe Pavelski as was his projection during his draft year? Probably not. Can the guy still be a damn good 3rd line center that can win key face-offs, take on tough match-ups, play with an edge, and elevate his game when it matters most? Absolutely. Bennett can play on my team any day of the week. Bring in Bennet, and then rotate Sutter and Beagle on a game to game basis on that 4th line C spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 25 minutes ago, higgyfan said: Trading Jake to Cal has some dangerous possibilities for JB. With Bennett; what you see is what you get. Jake is a bit of an enigma; there is a possibility that leaving Vancouver (and all the distractions it offers), could end up being just what he needs. I don't think Bennett plays C much; he usually plays W on the bottom 6. I agree that Pearson is a better player. The Canucks definitely have a need for a 3C. The Flyers are incredibly strong at C. Hayes, Giroux, Nolan, Couturier, Laughton and Bunnaman (rookie). They also have a couple of young C's on ELCs (non roster). Currently Scott Laughton is playing on the 4th line, but when Couturier returns from injury, he will lose his spot. He appears to be a JB type player and looks to have a lot of potential. https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/76690/scott-laughton A pretty all-round player with good leadership abilities. Plays a strong two-way game and reads the game exceptionally well. Not overly flashy, but can put up some points on the board. Good penalty killer and skater. Likes to play the body. http://sportsforecaster.com/nhl/player/9415t Usually gives maximum effort when on the ice. Is plenty feisty, but also displays very good two-way ability. Is also a pretty good leader. Can play both centre and wing at the highest level. Needs to continue to add more bulk to his 6-1 frame so that he may thrive in the long run playing his aggressive style at the National Hockey League level. Must also be more consistent. Long Range Potential:Quality, versatile and feisty two-way forward with a little upside. I don't know if Philly has a need for a W. I think there would have to be a sweetener along with Jake. Laughton would be a huge addition to the team if JB could get him. If we could trade Virtanen for Laughton i'd consider driving him to the airport. Always liked Laughton and he's not a slouch at all at his position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 1 minute ago, Warhippy said: If we could trade Virtanen for Laughton i'd consider driving him to the airport. Always liked Laughton and he's not a slouch at all at his position If we could do that trade I’d fly to Montreal right now just so I could be the one to drive Jake to the airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted February 1, 2021 Share Posted February 1, 2021 3 minutes ago, Warhippy said: If we could trade Virtanen for Laughton i'd consider driving him to the airport. Always liked Laughton and he's not a slouch at all at his position For sure. Poor guy has some stiff competition to even play at C. Flyers are stacked. He'll probably play 4th line W. What a waste when they could simply send him our way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now