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

[Trade] Canucks trade Adam Gaudette to Blackhawks for Matthew Highmore


Recommended Posts

On 5/5/2021 at 10:04 PM, wallstreetamigo said:

Not being able to move even a single bad contract cost this team a top 6 winger and a defenseman who helped Hughes a lot.

 

If we need veterans to hold the young players fragile hands I guess I would prefer impact veterans rather than average ones but thats just me.

 

On 5/6/2021 at 8:49 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

This is my concern though. 

 

Cap is coming available, just like it has several times during Bennings tenure. He genuinely believed the players he signed previously were keys to a competitive team. So what is he going to waste that cap space on?

 

If Benning does the same type of signings it means there will need to be another rebuild and no window for this core. 

 

On 5/6/2021 at 9:32 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

I have been obsessed with this team for over 40 years. Seen a lot of terrible management in that time. Can anyone blame me for wanting to see my team actually do the right things to win a cup before I die?

I'm starting here and haven't read the rest.

 

On the one hand, you talk of a player who "helped Hughes a lot" and, in the next breath, "young players fragile hands".  So it seems you understand and accept this need for veteran presence.  Or don't you?  Just when it relates to a player you've approved?

 

I'm quite sure Benning understands what's coming in the future and will need to be signed.  Because he's done something in the past does not guarantee he'll do it in the future.

 

Lastly....you've been obsessed with this team for over 40 years but that statement, alone, means you (like others) pin a long history to the current team and that's unfair.  This team does not own "the history"...they own their (short) history here.  

 

People have screamed over manaagement for a long time but that doesn't mean they were right.  

 

I don't know that you hold the key to winning the cup and your comment that you want to see the team do the right things (in order to do so) would suggest this.  It's just not that easy to win a cup....especially Canadian teams that seem to be up against the odds more.  

 

It's ok to be dissatisfied but if you throw in comments about decades of being in that state it's more your issue than theirs.  Your impatience is being placed on this team and that's unfair.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, oldnews said:

that's fair - if they make that decision based on this year's results - then it's fair to say - they did not make the playoffs

"should" they have?

I think most people in here assumed they were going to - and were going to dominate this team this year.  Instead they idled along at the pace of this team - who had far more legitimate reasons to underachieve than the Lames did imo.

Is that Treliving's fault?  I don't know. 

I've watched less hockey this year than ever - imo the hockey just have not been particularly compelling - league wide.  As much as I love Marky and Tanev, Calgary has been borderline unwatchable.

Should they fire him?  Not sure - hard to say the buck stops anywhere else - and  I'm not a fan of bringing Sutter in to coach that group - but at the same time, I find it hard to argue with most of Treliving's moves / throughout his tenure  (with the exception of course of a few mistakes like the Neal deal...that I think most if not all GMs make).  I think he's done a pretty good job overall - will be surprised if he is axed based on this covid season (I think a whole lot of teams have been inconsistent, and the hockey in general league-wide has not been very good / low energy / poor execution - exhausted teams struggling to make it through this season).  I can't imagine the playoffs will be a whole lot better - lots of teams are 3 or 4 games away from the postseason and playing some pretty bad, loose, inconsistent hockey.  For me he 'should' probably make another coaching change in the offseason- if he survives the offseason.  Personally I don't think I'd fire him.  There are a few core players/forwards I'd try to move, though.

 

he may be fired or not based on the last point - if he fails to make some improvements in the forward group between now and the first few days of free agency thats when I can see ownership making front office changes 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, gotta bring it up since it hasn't yet...Highmore got an apple last night and honestly looked great all game. Best game so far from him. I honestly think we have a really good player here. I have been watching him close since trading for him, and I still stand by what I said earlier. The guy is almost always on the right side of the puck. 10 games in, even plus/minus, and 1 assist. With room to get better.

 

I get Gaudette has more points. But we had tried him higher up in the line up with no luck, he just didn't gel well this our top 6. We needed to shore up our bottom 6 and he showed no interest in doing so. 

 

I'd rather have Highmore on the line up. The guy skates like the wind, is chippy, hits hard, wins puck battles, and is always crashing and banging and agitating. LOVE IT.

 

Highmore, Motte, and big Mac great bottom 6 forward that you can build a winning team with.

 

And lets be honest. If we lose Sutter, Rousell, Beagle all next year. We need guys for our bottom 6!!

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Highmore's showing that he can be a decent 4th line player.  I have liked Hawryluk's game which seems to fit well with Highmore's. I hope we stop seeing Highmore played in the top 6 for the remainder of the season (which may be more likely with Gadjovich having been called up).

 

Ultimately I think it will be hard to judge this trade as Gaudette and Highmore are totally different players.  If both ultimately become regulars but who perform different roles well, then maybe it's a bit of a wash.  Gaudette still holds the much higher potential to be a scorer (as compared to Highmore), so it will sting a bit if he ends up becoming a top-6 forward with the Blackhawks.  The funny thing however is that sometimes players just do better in other organizations and with different teammates.  Maybe that will be Gaudette (or maybe even Highmore).

 

I think it's fair to have gripes about management's handling of Gaudette but at this point, the reality is the Canucks have Highmore and even though he's probably not going to be a top scorer for the Canucks, he's been playing more and more solidly.  Happy to look forward to Highmore hopefully carving out a spot in the Canucks bottom 6 moving forward.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Attila Umbrus said:

Okay, gotta bring it up since it hasn't yet...Highmore got an apple last night and honestly looked great all game. Best game so far from him. I honestly think we have a really good player here. I have been watching him close since trading for him, and I still stand by what I said earlier. The guy is almost always on the right side of the puck. 10 games in, even plus/minus, and 1 assist. With room to get better.

 

I get Gaudette has more points. But we had tried him higher up in the line up with no luck, he just didn't gel well this our top 6. We needed to shore up our bottom 6 and he showed no interest in doing so. 

 

I'd rather have Highmore on the line up. The guy skates like the wind, is chippy, hits hard, wins puck battles, and is always crashing and banging and agitating. LOVE IT.

 

Highmore, Motte, and big Mac great bottom 6 forward that you can build a winning team with.

 

And lets be honest. If we lose Sutter, Rousell, Beagle all next year. We need guys for our bottom 6!!

lol.... This post reminds me of the pages of praises to Leivo - where is he now? One good game, with an assist, and Canucks fans can't resist to write endless praises of a player as if we have hit the jackpot. Gaudette's trajectory, we can somewhat predict, we have seen him play and perform for 3 seasons. Highmore, even before being traded here was a 0 offense grinder. Now, how is another Sutter/Beagle with less offense good for the Canucks again? We need more Sutters and Beagles?

 

Bottom 6 of Highmore/Motte/Macewen makes us a contender... Dude, learn more about the NHL. That bottom 6 is more like a team that can't find the right pieces and have to scrap together whatever they have available. Except for Motte, love him. 

You know what the previous Cup winner is hosting as their 4th line? Maroon, Colton and Joseph. Now compare it to what you wrote. Dont even need to mention their 3rd line, because it is way too overkill. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

lol.... This post reminds me of the pages of praises to Leivo - where is he now?

what a bad take.

First, Leivo was excellent here - deserved the praise.  Scored 37 pts in 85 games here - great pick up and great value.  Where is he now?  Uh, he was a free agent.  Since you evidently like to make small sample assumptions/conclusions, Gaudette had 7 pts in 33 games here this yeare - 0 pts in 10 playoff games - without the 'grinder' aspect - so, what does that make him?

"lol"

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, debluvscanucks said:

This team does not own "the history"...they own their (short) history here.  

This, so much this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

this post reminds me of the pages of praises to Leivo -

without the injuery to end last year, possibly on the Canucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

what a bad take.

First, Leivo was excellent here - deserved the praise.  Scored 37 pts in 85 games here - great pick up and great value.  Where is he now?  Uh, he was a free agent.  Since you evidently like to make small sample assumptions/conclusions, Gaudette had 7 pts in 33 games here this yeare - 0 pts in 10 playoff games - without the 'grinder' aspect - so, what does that make him?

"lol"

lol stop contradicting yourself in the post, or you cant even notice it. How is he great here, deserve praise, some great player who can make use win games and then we turn out to not even resign him for a asking price of 880K. 

  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

lol stop contradicting yourself in the post, or you cant even notice it. How is he great here, deserve praise, some great player who can make use win games and then we turn out to not even resign him for a asking price of 880K. 

weak argument - not even an argument actually - er, he signed elsewhere therefore he deserved no praise.

can you spot the logical fallacy?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

 

 

I'm starting here and haven't read the rest.

 

On the one hand, you talk of a player who "helped Hughes a lot" and, in the next breath, "young players fragile hands".  So it seems you understand and accept this need for veteran presence.  Or don't you?  Just when it relates to a player you've approved?

 

I'm quite sure Benning understands what's coming in the future and will need to be signed.  Because he's done something in the past does not guarantee he'll do it in the future.

 

Lastly....you've been obsessed with this team for over 40 years but that statement, alone, means you (like others) pin a long history to the current team and that's unfair.  This team does not own "the history"...they own their (short) history here.  

 

People have screamed over manaagement for a long time but that doesn't mean they were right.  

 

I don't know that you hold the key to winning the cup and your comment that you want to see the team do the right things (in order to do so) would suggest this.  It's just not that easy to win a cup....especially Canadian teams that seem to be up against the odds more.  

 

It's ok to be dissatisfied but if you throw in comments about decades of being in that state it's more your issue than theirs.  Your impatience is being placed on this team and that's unfair.  

I dont put responsibility for the entire 40 plus years I have been a fan on Benning or the current team. I do put the almost 20% of that time Benning has been in charge on him though.

 

Past performance, especially when it comes to the decision making process itself and the core beliefs shown by management, is a strong predictor of the future. Its not absolutely true that Benning will make the same mistakes, but it is not absolutely impossible to believe he will either. He fundamentally believes, even now, that his previous approach was the right one, even with strong evidence against that. If he didn't, he would not have signed Pearson mid season as an example.

 

With so much cap coming off the books from previous decisions by Benning, its not unreasonable to want a new GM to decide what to do with it rather than the guy who wasted it all in the first place. 

 

Veteran players are important to a team. But with the way the game has evolved its just as important that those veterans can still contribute on the ice too. Impact players are impact players not because of their age but because of their skill and their ability to fit a necessary role on the team. If they are injured all the time or in the press box or eating up extra cap dollars that could be used to improve the team, then the value of their intangibles is significantly lessened. 

 

I understand my opinions are not popular on here. I really dont care tbh. The fact that it triggers people enough to insult my mental health, or my intelligence, or my ability to think critically is more a reflection of those people than it is me or my opinions.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Do you ever have any fresh takes? Could you recommend any good replacements?

I noticed that you've consistently been making excuses for Green. Or am I mistaken? I don't think he'll survive the GM change, but I'm just guessing.

I mean, Jeff Gorton would be a welcome addition.

 

As for Green, who cares about him?  Let his contract expire, re-sign him, it doesn't matter.  The issues on this team are much bigger than him and this has been the case since the start of the season.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

I mean, Jeff Gorton would be a welcome addition.

 

As for Green, who cares about him?  Let his contract expire, re-sign him, it doesn't matter.  The issues on this team are much bigger than him and this has been the case since the start of the season.

Pretty much. I would prefer to see a coachibg change but we need a new management team far more imho.

 

Definitely need to get better assistant coaches though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I dont put responsibility for the entire 40 plus years I have been a fan on Benning or the current team. I do put the almost 20% of that time Benning has been in charge on him though.

 

Past performance, especially when it comes to the decision making process itself and the core beliefs shown by management, is a strong predictor of the future. Its not absolutely true that Benning will make the same mistakes, but it is not absolutely impossible to believe he will either. He fundamentally believes, even now, that his previous approach was the right one, even with strong evidence against that. If he didn't, he would not have signed Pearson mid season as an example.

 

With so much cap coming off the books from previous decisions by Benning, its not unreasonable to want a new GM to decide what to do with it rather than the guy who wasted it all in the first place. 

 

Veteran players are important to a team. But with the way the game has evolved its just as important that those veterans can still contribute on the ice too. Impact players are impact players not because of their age but because of their skill and their ability to fit a necessary role on the team. If they are injured all the time or in the press box or eating up extra cap dollars that could be used to improve the team, then the value of their intangibles is significantly lessened. 

 

I understand my opinions are not popular on here. I really dont care tbh. The fact that it triggers people enough to insult my mental health, or my intelligence, or my ability to think critically is more a reflection of those people than it is me or my opinions.

 

I agree with most of what you said here. JB has made some questionable moves, some of which turned out as mistakes, and who knows whether he will be able to assemble the right supporting cast for the team going forward. It may even be that change could be the better option.

 

But...

a) firing management is not automatically in improvement, it can backfire as easily as some of Benning signings and there are many examples of that. A new guy may have other strengths, but also other weaknesses. One gets the impression that some people on this board call for JB's or Green's head just out of frustration and for the sake of change. That's not a promising strategy and hopefully the real decision makers leave emotions out of the decision-making process.

 

b) I disagree that he has no vision, actually he has always been quite candid in voicing his approach.

  • I'll try to give the Sedins another shot, so I'll sign an impact player (LE) to give us a great top line and a good goalie (RM).
  • Our prospect pool is a black hole, but I don't want all prospects on the same development timeline, so I need some young players a bit further along hteir development a the cost of draft picks (SB, LV).
  • I'll get rid of all the useless prospects that will never amount to anything and try to get young roster players out of them (Jensen, Fox, Shinkaruk). Okay, he never said that.
  • I'll try to get solid players with leadership skills that can create an environment in which my drafted young talent can thrive (Dorsett, Sutter, Prust, Gudbranson).
  • I need defensively responsible bottom six players, because my own prospects intended for this role (Jasek, Lockwood, Lind) are not ready yet.

Obviously not all of these worked out, but I still believe he has always had the long term in mind. The next step, with the new core in place, is to surround these players with skills and talent to push for the playoffs. I believe he can do it. Other may not.

 

c) A full teardown entails so many risks and usually sets the rebuild back a year or two, I'd rather go for the right tweaks. Some front office and coaching positions could be improved, tactical tweaks may be required, I'm not sold on the development of our defensemen, JB may need someone to help him in negotiations to save some dollars or draft picks, things like that. Still I would keep him.

Edited by joe-max
  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, joe-max said:

I agree with most of what you said here. JB has made some questionable moves, some of which turned out as mistakes, and who knows whether he will be able to assemble the right supporting cast for the team going forward. It may even be that change could be the better option.

 

But...

a) firing management is not automatically in improvement, it can backfire as easily as some of Benning signings and there are many examples of that. A new guy may have other strengths, but also other weaknesses. One gets the impression that some people on this board call for JB's or Green's head just out of frustration and for the sake of change. That's not a promising strategy and hopefully the real decision makers leave emotions out of the decision-making process.

 

b) I disagree that he has no vision, actually he has always been quite candid in voicing his approach.

  • I'll try to give the Sedins another shot, so I'll sign an impact player (LE) to give us a great top line and a good goalie (RM).
  • Our prospect pool is a black hole, but I don't want all prospects on the same development timeline, so I need some young players a bit further along hteir development a the cost of draft picks (SB, LV).
  • I'll get rid of all the useless prospects that will never amount to anything and try to get young roster players out of them (Jensen, Fox, Shinkaruk). Okay, he never said that.
  • I'll try to get solid players with leadership skills that can create an environment in which my drafted young talent can thrive (Dorsett, Sutter, Prust, Gudbranson).
  • I need defensively responsible bottom six players, because my own prospects intended for this role (Jasek, Lockwood, Lind) are not ready yet.

Obviously not all of these worked out, but I still believe he has always had the long term in mind. The next step, with the new core in place, is to surround these players with skills and talent to push for the playoffs. I believe he can do it. Other may not.

 

c) A full teardwon entails so many risks and usually sets the rebuild back a year or two, I'd rather go for the right tweaks. Some front office and coaching positions could be improved, tactical tweaks may be required, I'm not sold on the development of our defensemen, JB may need someone to help him in negotiations to save some dollars or draft picks, things like that. Still I would keep him.

I accept your points.

 

But I struggle seeing how my posts on this subject give the impression of firing him for the sake of it or where I say there is no risk it could end up worse. There is that risk with both keeping him or firing him really.

 

Here is an example. They decide to fire Benning. Woohoo here we go! Then they hire Weisbrod or Mike Milbury to replace him. My thought tgen woukd be, "Why the &^@# did you fire Benning to replace him with that?"

 

Context matters always.

 

Calculated risks are different from possible risks. Thats always been my point. Changing management or keeping them needs to be a calculated risk always, not a reactionary one.

 

I try to give reasoning in my posts. I know many dont accept that and think I just hate Benning. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oldnews said:

weak argument - not even an argument actually - er, he signed elsewhere therefore he deserved no praise.

can you spot the logical fallacy?

 

lol here you are saying that Leivo is some hidden gem and played amazing for us. And then you can't explain and pretend to ignore the fact why we didn't resign him for 880K or the lack of backlash from anyone on this board. You are obviously lost in your own world. I am not going to try to make a pig fly here. What I post are my opinion on Highmore, easily verifiable in 1-2 years, feel free not to comment on my opinion because I am not gonna engage in a discussion with someone so stubborn. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

lol here you are saying that Leivo is some hidden gem and played amazing for us.

 

 

yeah - when a guy scores 37 pts in 85 games for us - for a 792.5k cap hit - that's not great value at all.

 

you're absolutely right - we should have expected more.

 

paraphrase that in any wishy washy way you want.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol.... This post reminds me of the pages of praises to Leivo - where is he now? One good game, with an assist, and Canucks fans can't resist to write endless praises of a player as if we have hit the jackpot. Gaudette's trajectory, we can somewhat predict, we have seen him play and perform for 3 seasons. Highmore, even before being traded here was a 0 offense grinder. Now, how is another Sutter/Beagle with less offense good for the Canucks again? We need more Sutters and Beagles?

 

Bottom 6 of Highmore/Motte/Macewen makes us a contender... Dude, learn more about the NHL. That bottom 6 is more like a team that can't find the right pieces and have to scrap together whatever they have available. Except for Motte, love him. 

You know what the previous Cup winner is hosting as their 4th line? Maroon, Colton and Joseph. Now compare it to what you wrote. Dont even need to mention their 3rd line, because it is way too overkill. 

Sorry to offend you lol.

 

It's my take, deal with it. I don't care what your thoughts are if you come at me like that.

 

Learn more about the NHL lol. Hilarious. I've travelled all over BC and Alberta watching hockey. Go pound sand. Where do you watch your hockey? Online? 

 

Laughable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaudette played 18 minutes the other night against Carolina but was unfortunately a -2 yet again, he really does have defensive weaknesses and as much as I loved him, you can't have anyone that bad defensively on your team going forward. Highmore isn't a great player, really a fringe NHLer but at least he's safe defensively and often on the right side of the puck, and does have a very good stick. I'd much rather that right now than a 20-30 point scoring forward who may contribute 30 goals to the team in some way, but is going to cost us those 30 goals plus another 10-14 against. 

 

That being said, guys like Highmore and Hawryluk probably don't start on most playoff teams right now, they're AHLers on those teams but are getting lucky with us. Motte on the other hand is a fantastic 4th liner, arguably one of the best in the league, especially when he's on his game.

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

Gaudette played 18 minutes the other night against Carolina but was unfortunately a -2 yet again, he really does have defensive weaknesses and as much as I loved him, you can't have anyone that bad defensively on your team going forward. Highmore isn't a great player, really a fringe NHLer but at least he's safe defensively and often on the right side of the puck, and does have a very good stick. I'd much rather that right now than a 20-30 point scoring forward who may contribute 30 goals to the team in some way, but is going to cost us those 30 goals plus another 10-14 against. 

 

That being said, guys like Highmore and Hawryluk probably don't start on most playoff teams right now, they're AHLers on those teams but are getting lucky with us. Motte on the other hand is a fantastic 4th liner, arguably one of the best in the league, especially when he's on his game.

Context matters.

 

Gaudette has had one game in Chi where he was a minus player. Highmore has had two in Van. He was -2 against Toronto one game. Does that mean he is garbage defensively?

 

Plus minus is easily the worst stat in hockey. Using it from a one game sample size to extrapolate the defensive awareness or value of a player is an incredibly unrealistic reach.

 

Gaudette is not great defensively. But he is not as bad as people suggest either. He has played reasonably well defensively in his Chicago games other than a bit shaky in the first one. Carolina beat Chicago 6-3 in that game I believe. Hard to point ro one guy to pin the loss on. Especially since the Hawks are not a great team and Carolina are.

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...